M/s Hindustan Surgical Works Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 4794/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 479420114 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 13-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 02-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SALIL MISHRA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Accommodation entries; Onus to prove; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4794/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 HINDUSTAN SURGICAL WORKS P. LTD., VS. ITO, 2066/6, CHUNA MANDI, WARD 12(4), PAHAR GANJ, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. AABCH1345M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. KAPIL GOEL, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SH. SALIL MISHRA, SR. DR ORDER PER C.L. SETHI, J.M. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS ASSAILED THE ORDE R DATED 06.09.2010 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE MA TTER OF AN ASSESSMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 147/14 3(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WHEREBY THE ADDITION OF R S. 8 LAKH ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT MADE BY THE AO HAS BEEN CONFIRMED, FOR THE A.Y. 2000-01. 2. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 28.11 .2000 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. NIL AND THE SAID RETU RN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE AO RECEIVED AN INFORMATION FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING , NEW ITA NO. 4794/D/10 2 DELHI THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS INVOLVED IN GIVING AND TAKING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 10 LAKHS (TWO ENTRIES OF RS. 5 LAKH EACH) AND CREDITED THE SAME I N ITS ACCOUNT. THIS AMOUNT WAS SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN RECEIV ED FROM M/S M. CHAND DISTRIBUTION CO. PVT. LTD., BANK A/C N O. CA03- 497 WITH UNITED WESTERN BANK, KAROL BAGH, DELHI. 3. IN THE LIGHT OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM IN VESTIGATION WING AND AFTER RECORDING THE REASONS US/ 148 OF THE ACT, THE AO INITIATED PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE ACT AND ISS UE NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT ON 23.03.2007. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS FOUND THAT ENTRY OF RS. 5 LAKH WAS WRONGLY MENTIONED TWICE AS AGAINST ACTUAL AMOUN T OF RS. 5 LAKH RECEIVED ONCE BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S M. CH AND DISTRIBUTION CO. PVT. LTD. IT WAS FURTHER NOTICED BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO RECEIVED SUM OF RS. 3 LAKH FR OM THE SAME COMPANY DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE AO, THEREFORE, ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 8 LAKH. BEFORE THE AO, THE ASSESSEE FILED COPY OF BANK ACCOUNTS SHOWING THAT ALL THE PAYMENTS FROM THE AFO RESAID COMPANY WERE RECEIVED THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES . THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF ONE SH. SATISH CHANDRA GOEL, DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY STATING THAT M/S M. C HAND ITA NO. 4794/D/10 3 DISTRIBUTION CO. PVT. LTD. IS REGISTERED WITH REGIS TRAR OF COMPANY OF DELHI AND HARYANA AND THEY HAD SUBSCRIBE D THE SHARES THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BY MAKING PAYMENT OF RS . 5 LAKH AND RS. 3 LAKH THROUGH CHEQUES AND THE AFORESA ID AMOUNT WAS INVESTED OUT OF THEIR OWN CAPITAL AND OW N FUNDS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO PRODUCED A COPY OF INCOME TAX INT IMATION ISSUED BY THE AO FOR THE A.Y. 1998-99 IN RESPECT OF M/S M. CHAND DISTRIBUTION CO. PVT. LTD. THE CERTIFICATE O F REGISTRAR OF COMPANYS WAS ALSO PRODUCED ALONG WITH BOARD RESOLU TION TO MAKE INVESTMENT IN THE SHARES OF ASSESSEE COMPANY. HOWEVER, THESE DOCUMENTS WERE NOT ACCEPTED BY THE A O IN THE LIGHT OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIG ATION WING STATING THAT SH. SATISH CHANDRA GOEL IN HIS STATEME NT BEFORE THE INVESTIGATION WING HAD ADMITTED THAT HE WAS INV OLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES IN LIEU OF CASH REC EIVED FROM THE BENEFICIARIES. THE AO, THEREFORE, TREATED THE CREDIT OF RS. 8 LAKH AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES . 4. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEA L BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ITA NO. 4794/D/10 4 5. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE REITERATED H IS SUBMISSIONS, AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE VARIOUS DOCUME NTS AND EVIDENCES PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO, CONTENDED THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE AND NA TURE OF CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 8 LAKH AND HAS BEEN ABLE TO DIS CLOSE THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS FOR THE REASONS GIVEN BELOW: - 1) THAT IDENTITY OF THE SHAREHOLDER HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED; 2) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE SHAREHOLDER HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED AS THE I.T. DETAILS FOR THE RELEVANT PERIOD WAS NOT FILED; 3) TRANSACTION IN QUESTION COULD NOT BE VERIFIED FR OM THE RETURN OF THE INVESTOR, WHICH WAS NEVER FILED B Y IT. 4) AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE THE AO WAS SELF-SERVING DOCUMENT EXECUTED BY THE PARTY AND CANNOT BE TREATED TO BE SACROSANCT TO ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR; 5) THE CREDITOR COULD NOT BE CONTACTED AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS; 6) EVIDENCE OF ALLOTMENT OF SHARES HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED TO HIS SATISFACTION. 6. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ITA NO. 4794/D/10 5 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED ALL THE SUBMISSIONS AND CONTENTIONS THAT WERE MADE BEFORE T HE AO AND RELIED UPON THE VARIOUS EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES TO PROVE AND ESTABLISH THAT THE CREDIT ENTRIES OF RS. 8 LAKH TOWARDS SHARE CAPITAL WAS GENUINE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE BASED ON IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES HAS BEEN DECIDED IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR TH E A.Y. 2001-02 BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 20.08.2010 IN ITA NO. 1786/DEL/2010. 8. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHE R HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND S UBMITTED THAT THE CREDITOR HAS HIMSELF ADMITTED BEFORE THE I NVESTIGATION WING THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATIO N ENTRIES TO VARIOUS BENEFICIARIES AND, THEREFORE, THE AMOUNT OF RS. 8 LAKH RECEIVED FROM THE SAID CREDITOR HAS BEEN RIGHT LY TREATED TO BE AN UNEXPLAINED MONEY OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ITA NO. 4794/D/10 6 10. IN THIS CASE, THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION ON T HE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING STATING THAT THE CREDITOR BEFORE THE INVESTIGATION WING HAS ADMITTED THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENT RIES TO VARIOUS BENEFICIARIES. HOWEVER, IN THE COURSE OF A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE COPY OF STATEMENT OF SH. SATISH CH ANDRA GOEL RECORDED BY THE INVESTIGATION WING HAS NOT BEE N BROUGHT ON RECORD NOR ITS COPY HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASS ESSEE. THE COPY OF THE REPORT GIVEN BY THE INVESTIGATION W ING HAS ALSO NOT BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD EXCEPT STATING IN T HE BODY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE AO RECEIVED THE INFOR MATION FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING THAT THE CREDITOR WAS I NVOLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE AO HAS FAILED TO MAKE FURTHER ENQUIRY AT HIS OWN LEVEL TO ASCERTAIN AS TO WHETHER THE SUM OF RS. 8 LAKH RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE CREDITOR WERE ACTUALLY IN THE NATURE OF AN ACCOMMODATION ENT RY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCE D BEFORE THE AO THE COPY OF MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES O F ASSOCIATION OF THE CREDITOR, COPY OF SHARE APPLICAT ION, COPY OF BOARD RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE CREDITOR FOR APPLYIN G THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, COPY OF AFFIDAVIT O F ONE OF THE DIRECTOR CONFIRMING THE INVESTMENT IN SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF THE CREDITOR ITA NO. 4794/D/10 7 AS WELL AS THE INCOME TAX INTIMATION AND BALANCE SH EET FOR EARLIER A.Y. 1998-99. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PRODU CED A COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION WITH THE REGIS TRAR OF COMPANIES IN RESPECT OF CREDITOR. IT IS NOT IN DIS PUTE THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES. THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITOR HAS BEEN PERUSED AND W E FIND THAT NO CASH MONEY WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUN T OF THE CREDITOR TO COVER UP THE AMOUNT PAID TO ASSESSEE CO MPANY. THE CREDITOR RECEIVED THE SUM OF RS. 5 LAKH AND RS. 3 LAKH BY CHEQUE OUT OF WHICH THE AMOUNT OF RS. 5 LAKH AND 3 LAKH WERE PAID TO THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS SHARE CAPITAL. IN THE LIGHT OF THESE DOCUMENTS, IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVE, THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. IN THE LIGHT OF THE IDENTICAL PIECE OF EVIDENCES, THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN THE A.Y. 2001-02 HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 2000750/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM TWO DIFFERENT CREDITOR S. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER IS AS UNDE R: - 11. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MAINLY ASSIGNED TWO REASONS. THE FIRST REASON IS THAT SHRI AK GUPTA HAS DISCLOSED BEFORE THE ITA NO. 4794/D/10 8 INVESTIGATION WING THAT HE WAS INVOLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. THIS INFORMATION WAS NEVER SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE. WHAT WAS THE EXACT INFORMATION IT HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED EITHER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OR BY THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. IT MAY BE A STARTING POINT OF INVESTIGATION BUT CANNOT BE CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NEITHER ALLEGED THAT SHRI AK GUPTA HAS SPECIFICALLY DISCLOSED ABOUT THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. CONTRARY TO THIS, ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI AK GUPTA DISCLOSING THAT HE HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. ASSESSING OFFICER INSTEAD OF CONFRONTING THE ASSESSEE WITH THE MATERIAL OBSERVED THAT SUCH TYPE OF AFFIDAVITS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE. HE GOES ON TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS THE AFFIDAVIT, HOW IT CAN BE CONSIDERED AS AN EVIDENCE IN ANY PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT. IN OUR OPINION, THAT IS NOT THE EXACT DISPUTE. THE DISPUTE IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ARMED WITH AN INFORMATION. HE WAS BOUND TO CONFRONT THE ASSESSEE WITH THAT INFORMATION. WHEN ASSESSEE SOUGHT TO REFUTE THAT INFORMATION BY THE AFFIDAVIT OF PERSON ON WHOSE STATEMENT ASSESSING OFFICER IS HARPING THEN THE AFFIDAVIT HAS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED IN THE NATURE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IN EXAMINATION IN ITA NO. 4794/D/10 9 CHIEF OR A POSITIVE EVIDENCE AT THE FIRST INSTANCE. THE STATEMENT OF SHRI AK GUPTA HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE UNLESS IT STOOD SCRUTINY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS GIVEN WEIGHTAGE TO THE STATEMENT OF SHRI AK GTUPTA WHICH WAS NOT RECORDED BY HIM BUT BY THE INVESTIGATION WING. IN WHAT EXACT SENSE THIS STATEMENT IS, NOT DISCERNIBLE FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THUS, THERE IS NO INFORMATION EXACTLY WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH CAN GOAD ANY AUTHORITY TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS AVAILED ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. IT IS JUST A BALD ASSERTION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN A SWEEPING WAY. THE SECOND REASON ASSIGNED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DISBELIEVING THE VERSION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT IT FAILED TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTORS BEFORE HIM OR THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER OF THE SHARE APPLICANTS. IN THIS CONNECTION, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REFER THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VICTOR ELECTRODES LTD. RENDERED IN ITA NO.586/DEL/10 WHICH HAS BEEN DELIVERED ON 12.5.2010. IN THIS JUDGMENT, HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS WITH REGARD TO THE OBLIGATION OF AN ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTORS OF A COMPANY WHO HAS APPLIED FOR A SHARE APPLICATION. THE OBSERVATIONS READ AS UNDER: VICTOR ELECTRODES LTD . ITA NO.586/DEL/10: ITA NO. 4794/D/10 10 9. THERE WAS NO LEGAL OBLIGATION ON THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE SOME DIRECTOR OR OTHER REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT COMPANIES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, FAILURE OF ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THEM COULD NOT, BY ITSELF, HAVE JUSTIFIED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED DOCUMENTS, ON THE BASIS OF WHICH, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IF HE SO WANTED COULD HAVE SUMMONED THEM FOR VERIFICATION. NO ATTEMPT WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUMMON THE DIRECTORS OF THE APPLICANT COMPANIES. THE ADDRESSES OF THESE COMPANIES MUST BE AVAILABLE ON THE SHARE APPLICATIONS, MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION AND THEIR INCOME-TAX RETURNS. IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ANY DOUBT ABOUT IDENTITY OF THE SHARE APPLICANTS, HE COULD HAVE SUMMONED THE DIRECTORS OF THE APPLICANT COMPANIES. NO SUCH ATTEMPT WAS, HOWEVER, MADE BY HIM. THEREFORE, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) AND THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN OUR VIEW WERE JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE IDENTITY OF SHARE APPLICATIONS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. 12. HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE CIT VS. DWARKADHESE RENDERED IN ITA NO.911/DEL/10 HAS CONSIDERED THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. HON'BLE SUPREME ITA NO. 4794/D/10 11 COURT IN THE CASE OF LOVELY EXPORTS AND A NUMBER OF OTHER JUDGMENTS ON THE ISSUE OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY AN ASSESSEE WHICH HAS BEEN TREATED AS A BOGUS CASH CREDITS. THE OBSERVATIONS RECORDED BY THE HON'BLE COURT IN PARAGRAPH 8 IS WORTH TO NOTE WHICH READ AS UNDER: ITA NO. 911/DEL/10 8. IN ANY MATTER, THE ONUS OF PROOF IS NOT A STATIC ONE. THOUGH IN SECTION 68 PROCEEDINGS, THE INITIAL BURDEN OF PROOF LIES ON THE ASSESSEE YET ONCE HE PROVES THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR/SHARE APPLICANTS BY EITHER FURNISHING THEIR PAN NUMBER OR INCOME-TAX ASSESSMENT NUMBER AND SHOWS THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION BY SHOWING MONEY IN HIS BOOKS EITHER BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE OR BY DRAFT OR BY ANY OTHER MODE, THEN THE ONUS OF PROOF WOULD SHIFT TO THE REVENUE. JUST BECAUSE THE CREDITORS/SHARE APPLICANTS COULD NOT BE FOUND AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN, IT WOULD NOT GIVE THE REVENUE THE RIGHT TO INVOKE SECTION 68. ONE MUST NOT LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT IT IS THE REVENUE WHICH HAS ALL THE POWER AND WHEREWITHAL TO TRACE ANY PERSON. MOREOVER, IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT THE ASSESSEE NEED NOT TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF SOURCE. 13. APART FROM THIS ONE LAPSE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT FAILED TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTORS, IT HAS FILED ALL OTHER NECESSARY ITA NO. 4794/D/10 12 EVIDENCE FOR EXPLAINING SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY IT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ONLY CIRCUMSTANCE NARRATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THAT HE RECEIVED INFORMATION EXHIBITING THE INVOLVEMENT OF THESE SHARE APPLICANTS IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY BUT HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE NATURE OF THAT INFORMATION AND HOW IT IS RELATED TO THE ASSESSEE. HIS OBSERVATIONS ARE JUST GENERAL IN NATURE WITHOUT SPECIFYING ANY MATERIAL. WITH SUCH TYPE OF GENERAL INFORMATION, HE CANNOT TREAT THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS BOGUS IN A SWEEPING WAY. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.20,00,750. WE ALLOW GROUND NO.5 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AND DELETE THE ADDITION. 11. IN THE LIGHT OF THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN THE A.Y. 1991-92, ON THE SAM E SET OF FACTS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LD . CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 8 L AKH MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIV ED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, DELETE THE ADDITION. ITA NO. 4794/D/10 13 12. THE OTHER GROUND OF APPEAL CHALLENGING THE VALI DITY OF INITIATING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 AND NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE ACT WERE NOT PRESSED BY THE A SSESSEES COUNSEL AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL AND T HUS, THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED FOR. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AS INDICATED ABOVE. THIS DECISION IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.12.11 SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGGRAWAL) (C.L. SETHI ) VICE PRESIDENT JU DICIAL MEMBER DATED: 16.12.11 *KAVITA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITA NO. 4794/D/10 14 ITA NO. 4794/D/10 15