M/s Sunaina Towers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4514/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6472 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 10-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 30-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIMA BANWAL
• Keywords: Accommodation entries; Reason to believe; Borrowed satisfaction
• Section: 143(3); 147; 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4514/DEL/2013 AY: 20 04-05 SUNAINA TOWERS PVT. LTD., VS ASSTT. COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, M-11, MIDDLE CIRCLE, CENTR AL CIRCLE-23, CONNAUGHT CIRCUS, NEW DELHI-110001 NEW DELHI-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.P. RASTOGI, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. ANIMA BANWAL, SR. DR ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.05.2013 OF LD. CIT(A)-XXXIII, NEW DELHI FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT ON THEFACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXXII I, NEW DELHI ERRED IN REJECTING APPELLANT'S CONTENTION THAT ASSESSMENT ORDER MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER WAS BAD IN LAW AND VOID AB-INITIO. 2. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-XXXIII, NEW DELHI ERRED IN UPHOLDING T HE ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION U/S 147 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND IN MAKING THE ASSESSMENTS IN PURSUANCE THEREOF. I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 2 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-XXX III, NEW DELHI ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.25 LACS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961. 3.1 THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-XX XIII, NEW DELHI ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF AMOUN T OF RS.25LACS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT TOWARDS SALE OF INVESTMENT IN SHARE AS INCOME U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 DESPITE SEVERAL JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS TO THE EFFECT THAT SECTION 68 WAS NOT APPLICABLE IN SUCH A SITUATION. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES PERMISSION TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR VARY ALL OR ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE T HE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. IN GROUND NOS. 1 AND 2, VALIDITY OF ASSESSMEN T FRAMED UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 HAS BEEN QUEST IONED. WE THUS PREFER TO ADJUDICATE UPON THESE GROUNDS FIRST. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME AT R S. 21,168/- INITIALLY ON 21.10.2004. SUBSEQUENTLY, ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI IN MARCH 2011, THE ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATED PROCEED INGS UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AND BEING NOT SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING ENTR IES OF RS. 25 LACS FROM FEDERAL BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S. CHANDERPRABH U FINANCIAL SERVICES ADDED THE SAID AMOUNT IN THE TOT AL INCOME OF I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 3 THE ASSESSEE. BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASS ESSEE HAD RAISED OBJECTION AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF INITIATION OF REOPENING PROCEEDINGS BUT COULD NOT SUCCEED. IT RAISED THIS I SSUE AGAIN BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) BUT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS ALSO DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, HE NCE, THE SAME HAS BEEN QUESTIONED BEFORE THE ITAT. 4. IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUND ON THE ISSUE, THE LEAR NED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE REASONS RECORDED UNDER SEC. 148( 2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 IN THE PRESENT CASE ARE BASED ON BORROWED SATISFACTION OF A COLLEAGUE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 9, NEW DELHI, HENCE, THE VERY INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SEC . 147 OF THE ACT IS BAD IN LAW. 4.1 THE LEARNED AR CONTENDED FURTHER THAT THERE WAS NO APPLICATION OF HER OWN MIND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R FOR FORMATION OF BELIEF HERSELF THAT INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AS IT IS VERY MUCH EVIDENT FROM THE REASONS RECORDE D THAT HER ACTION WAS SOLELY BASED UPON THE INFORMATION RECEIV ED FROM HER COLLEAGUE. 4.2 IN SUPPORT, THE LEARNED AR REFERRED THE CONTEN TS OF THE REASONS RECORDED AND REPRODUCED AT PAGE NO.2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 4 4.3 THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO AP PLICATION OF MIND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS EVIDENT FROM THE T ELLTALE EVIDENCE ON RECORD. WHILE THE REASONS WERE RECORDED ON THE B ELIEF THAT CHANDERPRABHU FINANCE SERVICES (P) LTD./CHANDERPRAB HU FINANCIAL & SECURITY LTD. DEPOSITED RS. 25 LACS WHI CH WAS CONSTRUED/CONCEIVED TO BE IN THE NATURE OF INCOME B Y LABELLING IT AS AN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY, THE FACTS ARE ALTO GETHER DIFFERENT IN AS MUCH AS THE SUM OF RS. 25 LACS WAS THE SALE PROCEEDS OF 2,50,000 SHARES OF KKP CONSTRUCT ION LTD. @ RS. 10 PER SHARE. THE TRANSACTION WAS NOT A DEPOSIT BY CHANDERPRABHU FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. BUT WAS THE SALE PROCEEDS IN RESPECT OF THE SALE OF SHARES. HE ALSO REFERRED TO THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE INITI ATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE AS SESSING OFFICER. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTIONS, THE LEARNED AR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS AS WELL: I) ANDAMAN TIMBER IND. VS. CIT - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 422 8 OF 2006 - ORDER DATED 02.09.2015 (S.C); II) PR. CIT VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD. - ITA 545/2015 - ORDER DATED 08.10.2015 (DEL.); III) USG BUILDWELL PVT. LTD. VS ACIT I.T.A. NO. 4517/DEL/2013 ITAT DELHI H BENCH I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 5 5. THE LEARNED SENIOR DR ON THE OTHER HAND TRIED TO JUSTIFY THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THE ISSUE. SHE S UBMITTED THAT IN THE REASONS RECORDED, SPECIFIC INFORMATION WAS T HERE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD APPLIED HER MIND BEFORE RECORDING OF REASONS. THE LEARNED SENIOR DR CONTENDED THAT SUFFICIENCY OF APPLICATION OF MIND IS NOT REQU IRED TO BE CONSIDERED AT THE STAGE OF RECORDING OF REASONS. 6. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ABOVE CITED DECISIONS, ESPECIALLY THE RECENT DECISIONS OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COU RT OF DELHI IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD. (SUPRA), WE FIND THAT THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT AFTER DETAILED DISCUSSION ON THE ISSUE AND AFTER DISCUSSING SEVERAL DECISIONS CITED BEFORE THE HONBLE COURT HAS BEEN PLEASED TO COME THE FOLLOWING CONCLU SION VIDE PARA NOS. 12 AND 13 OF THE DECISION, WHICH ARE RELE VANT TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE ISSUE RAISED BEFORE US IN THE P RESENT CASE, ARE BEING REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: 12. IN THE PRESENT CASE, AFTER SETTING OUT FOUR EN TRIES, STATED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON A SINGLE D ATE I.E. 10 TH FEBRUARY 2003, FROM FOUR ENTRIES WHICH WERE TERMED AS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, WHICH INFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO HIM BY THE DIRECTORATE OF INVESTIGATION, THE A.O. STATE D: I HAVE ALSO PERUSED VARIOUS MATERIALS AND REPORT FROM INVE STIGATION I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 6 WING AND ON THAT BASIS IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSES SEE COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN ITS BANK ACCOUNT BY WAY OF ABOVE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE ABOVE CONCLUSION IS UNHELPFUL IN UNDERSTANDING WHET HER THE A.O. APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS THAT HE TALK S ABOUT PARTICULARLY SINCE HE DID NOT DESCRIBE WHAT THOSE M ATERIALS WERE. ONCE THE DATE ON WHICH THE SO CALLED ACCOMMOD ATION ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IS KNOWN, IT WOULD NOT HAVE B EEN DIFFICULT FOR THE A.O., IF HE HAD IN FACT UNDERTAKE N THE EXERCISE, TO MAKE A REFERENCE TO THE MANNER IN WHIC H THOSE VERY ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE A SSESSEE, WHICH MUST HAVE BEEN TENDERED ALONG WITH THE RETURN , WHICH WAS FILED ON 14 TH NOVEMBER 2004 AND WAS PROCESSED UNDER SEC. 143(3) OF THE ACT. WITHOUT FORMING A PRIMA FAC IE OPINION, ON THE BASIS OF SUCH MATERIAL, IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE A.O. TO HAVE SIMPLY CONCLUDED: IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE A SSESSEE COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN ITS BANK BY WAY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. IN THE CONSI DERED VIEW OF THE COURT, IN LIGHT OF THE LAW EXPLAINED WI TH SUFFICIENT CLARITY BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE DECISIO NS DISCUSSED HEREINBEFORE, THE BASIC REQUIREMENT THAT THE A.O. MUST APPLY HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS IN ORDER TO HA VE REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IS MISSING IN THE PRESENT CASE. 13. MR. SAWHNEY TOOK THE COURT THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) TO SHOW HOW THE CIT(A) DISCUSS ED THE MATERIALS PRODUCED DURING THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL . THE COURT WOULD LIKE TO OBSERVE THAT THIS IS IN THE NATURE OF A POST MORTEM EXERCISE AFTER THE EVENT OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 7 HAS TAKEN PLACE. WHILE THE CIT MAY HAVE PROCEEDED O N THE BASIS THAT THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WAS VALI D, THIS DOES NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF LAW THAT PRIOR TO THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE A.O. HAS TO APPLY HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS, CONCLUDE THAT HE HAS REASON TO BELIE VE THAT INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. UNLE SS THAT BASIC JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENT IS SATISFIED, A PO ST MORTEM EXERCISE OF ANALYZING MATERIALS PRODUCED SUBSEQUENT TO THE REOPENING WILL NOT RESCUE AN INHERENTLY DEFECTIVE R EOPENING ORDER FROM INVALIDITY. 14. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CONCLUSION REACHED B Y THE ITAT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE ERRONEOUS. NO SUBSTANTIAL QUES TION OF LAW ARISES. 7. NOW, WE HAVE TO EXAMINE THE REASONS RECORDED I N THE PRESENT CASE BEFORE US IN VIEW OF THE RATIOS LAID DOWN IN T HE ABOVE CITED DECISION OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT R ECENTLY PRONOUNCED ON 08.10.2015 TO VERIFY THE CONTENTION O F THE LEARNED AR THAT WHILE FORMING THE BELIEF THAT INCOM E CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF INFOR MATION RECEIVED BY IT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT APPLI ED HER MIND. THE REASONS RECORDED IN THE PRESENT CASE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPOSE ARE BEING REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 8 2. AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI, A SURVEY OPERATION W AS CONDUCTED IN THE S.K. GUPTA GROUP OF CASES ON 20.11.2007, ARUNACHAL BUILDING, 19-BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-1100 01 AND 1007-1008, ARUNACHAL BUILDING, 19- BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-1100 01. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY PROCEEDINGS SEVERAL LED GER ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED IN TALLY FOR THE F.Y. 2003-04, BESIDES VARIOUS OTHER DOCUMENTS/ACCOUNTS WERE FOUND. FURTHER, DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY & ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. SH. S.K. GUPTA ADMITTED THA T HE HAD BEEN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO VARIOUS PERSONS/BENEFICIARIES THROUGH A LARGE NO. O F SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS FLOATED BY & EFFECTIVELY CONTROLLED BY HIM. HE OPERATED A NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS IN THE SAME BANK/BRANCH OR IN DIFFERENT BRANCHES, IN T HE NAMES OF THESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS. AFTER RECEIVING CASH FROM THE BENEFICIARIES, SH.S.K. GUPT A USED TO DEPOSIT THE SAME IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF ONE OF THE THESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS. THEN HE USED TO ROUTE THE ENTRIES THROUGH TWO TO FOUR ACCOUNTS OF T HESE SHELL COMPANIES/CONCERNS BEFORE ULTIMATELY- TRANSFERRING SAME TO THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF TIRE BENEFICIARIES TO GIVE THE COLOR OF GENUINENESS TO T HESE TRANSACTIONS. 3. FURTHER, AS PER THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI, M/S. SUNAINA TOWERS PVT. LTD. HAS RECEIVED AMOUNT OF RS.25,00,00 0 VIDE CHEQUE NO. 778926 DATED 10.10.2003, FROM THE FEDERAL BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S. CHANDERPRABHU FINANCIAL SERVICES/CHANDERPRABHU FINANCE & SECURITIES LTD., A SHELL COMPANY/CONCERN FLOATED/CONTROLLED BY SHRI S.K. GUPTA. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT AMOUNT/INCOME OF RS.25,00,000 HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 FOR FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY AL L MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 9 5. ISSUE NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 8. THE VERY PERUSAL OF THE REASONS, IT IS APPAREN T THAT THESE WERE BASED ON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM ACIT, CENTRA L CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI AFTER NARRATION OF WHICH, THE ASSESSING O FFICER HAS SIMPLY RECORDED THAT SHE HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT AMOUNT/INCOME OF RS.25 LACS HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 FOR FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECE SSARY FOR ITS ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC. 147 OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961. NOTICE UNDER SEC. 148 OF THE ACT HAS ACCORDIN GLY BEEN ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THE ABOVE CITED DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT THAT SUCH TYPE OF CONCLUSION IS UNHELPFUL IN UNDERSTANDING WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE MATERIALS THAT HE TALKS ABOUT PARTICULARLY SINCE HE DID NOT DESCRIBE WHAT THOSE MATERIAL WERE. HON'BLE HIGH COU RT HAS OBSERVED FURTHER THAT ONCE THE DATE ON WHICH THE SO -CALLED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IS KNOWN, IT WO ULD NOT HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IF H E HAD IN FACT I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 10 UNDERTAKEN THE EXERCISE, TO MAKE A REFERENCE TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THOSE VERY ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED IN THE ACCOU NTS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS HELD THAT WITHOUT FORMING A PRIMA FACIE OPINION, ON THE BASIS OF SUCH MATERIAL, IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO HAVE SIMPLY CONCLUDED, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INTRODUCED ITS OWN UNACCOUNTED MONEY IN ITS BANK BY WAY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE BASIC REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MUST APPLY HIS MIND T O THE MATERIAL IN ORDER TO FORM REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. SUCH BASIC REQUIRE MENT WHILE RECORDING THE REASONS FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE ACT IS MISSING IN THE PRESENT CASE BEFORE US . AS IT IS EVIDENT IN THE REASONS RECORDED, REPRODUCED HEREINABOVE, TH E ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SIMPLY RECORDED THE INFORMATION RECEIVE D FROM HER COLLEAGUE AND WITHOUT MAKING ANY EXERCISE OF HER MI ND ON THOSE INFORMATION TO FORM HER OWN REASONS TO BELIEVE FOR THE ESCAPED ASSESSMENT OF RS.25 LACS, HAS ISSUED NOTICE UNDER S EC. 148 OF THE ACT. WE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE RATIOS LAID DO WN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN THE C ASE OF CIT VS. G&G PHARMA INDIA LTD. (SUPRA), HOLD THAT THE REASON S TO BELIEVE RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE PRESENT CA SE TO INITIATE I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 11 THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE ACT WITHOUT A PPLICATION OF HER OWN MIND ON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED WERE NOT A S PER THE REQUIREMENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW LAID DOWN UNDER SEC. 147 OF THE ACT, HENCE, THE INITIATION OF THE PROCEEDING S WAS NOT VALID AND NOR THE ASSESSMENT MADE IN FURTHERANCE TO THE S AID INITIATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSMENT FRAME D UNDER SEC. 147 READ WITH 143(3) OF THE ACT IN THE PRESENT CASE IN QUESTION IS THUS HELD AS VOID-AB-INITIO. THE GROUND NOS. 1 AND 2 ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 9. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, HOLDING THE VER Y ASSESSMENT ORDER IN QUESTION AS VOID, THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE REMAINING GROUNDS QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF ADDITION OF RS. 25 LACS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVE BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. T HESE GROUNDS ARE ACCORDINGLY DISPOSED OF. 10. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11TH OF MAR CH, 2016. SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGRAWAL) (SUD HANSHU SRIVASTAVA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: THE 11 TH OF MARCH, 2016 GS I.T.A. NO. 4514/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 12 COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR