DCIT, Circle-2, Meerut V. Reeta Singhal, Meerut

ITA 4819/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7379 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: YOGESH SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMIT GOYAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Search and seizure; Cost of acquisition; Accommodation entries

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES CAMP AT MEERUT BEFORE SHRI N. S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, MEERUT. VS REETA SINGHAL, A-312, PRAHLAD VATIKA, KHAIR NAGAR, MEERUT. PAN : ABTPS 0061P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI YOGESH SHARMA, SR.D.R. RESPONDENT BY : S/SHRI RAJ KUMAR & SHRI SUMIT GOYAL , CA / DATE OF HEARING : 09/01/2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17/01/2019 ORDER PER N.S. SAINI, A. M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), MEERUT DATED 06.04.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEA L IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION O F RS.69,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACC OUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE GUISE OF SALE OF SHA RES. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER OBSERVED THAT INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM ASSISTA NT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION), NEW DELHI T HAT SEARCH ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 2 AND SEIZURE/SURVEY OPERATION WAS CARRIED OUT UPON T HE ENTRY PROVIDERS, SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR JINDAL, SHRI SAJAN KU MAR JAIN, SHRI PREM ARORA GROUP AND SHRI PAWAN ARYA AND HIS F AMILY MEMBERS. DURING THE COURSE OF INVESTIGATION, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE SAID PERSONS WERE ENTRY PROVIDER AND WAS PROVID ING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES IN THE FORM OF BOGUS SHARE PR EMIUM, EXEMPT LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND ADVANCE AGAINST P ROPERTY ETC FROM FRONT AND NON-DESCRIPT COMPANIES AND SMT. REETA SINGHAL IS ONE OF THE BENEFICIARY WHO HAS RECEIVED ACCOMMODATION ENTRY AMOUNTING TO RS.69 LAC. 3. THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISS ION AND STATED THAT SMT. REETA SINGHAL HAS SOLD SHARE OF SH RI GANGA PAPER MILLS PVT. LTD. FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.50 LAC WHICH IS RECEIVED THROUGH RTGS AND BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.19 L AC WAS RETURNED BACK. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SHARES OF SHRI GANGA PAPER MILLS PVT. LTD. WERE ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND THESE SHARES WERE SOLD TO M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB PVT. LTD. IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 0-11. THERE WAS NO PROFIT AND GAINS IN THIS TRANSACTION. THE ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 3 ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT SUBMISSION OF THE A SSESSEE WAS EXAMINED AND FOUND DEVOID OF MERIT AND NOT CONV INCING. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE AR OF THE ASSESSE E WAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED WHY M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB PVT. LTD . HAS PAID RS.19 LAC IN EXCESS OF SALE CONSIDERATION WITHOUT R ECEIPT OF SHARES OF THIS VALUE. HE WAS NOT ABLE TO GIVE SATIS FACTORY REPLY. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DOCUMENT TO SUBSTANTIATE HER CLAIM REGARDING HOLDING OF SHARES OF VARIOUS COMPANIES BY HER AND INFLOW/OUTFLOW OF SHARES IN HE R CAPITAL ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, HE HELD THAT THE AMOUNT DECLARE D ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF SHARES BY THE ASSESSEE AMOUNTING TO RS.69 LAC IS HEREBY TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AN D ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION B Y OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED RS.69 LAC THRO UGH RTGS FROM M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB PVT. LTD. AS UNDER: RS. 25,00,000/- THROUGH RTGS ON 13006.2009 FROM M/ S. MAYANK MEDILAB (P) LTD. RS. 25,00,000/- -DO- RS. 19,00,000/- -DO- RS. 69,00,000/- ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 4 4.1 HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT RS.50 LAC VIDE TWO RTG S OF RS.25 LAC EACH RECEIVED ON 30.06.2009 WAS TOWARDS S ALE CONSIDERATION OF 5 LAC SHARES OF M/S. SHRI GANGA PA PER MILLS PVT. LTD. OF FACE VALUE OF RS.10/- EACH, SOLD AT PA R @ RS.10/-. THUS, TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED AT RS.50 LAC. THE ASSESSEE ACQUIRED THE SHARES PRIOR TO THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2010-11, I.E., PARTLY IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 A ND PARTLY IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AS UNDER: A.Y. 2006-07 DATE OF PURCHASE NO. OF SHARES PURCHASED FACE VALUE PER SHARE PER SHARE PURCHASE COST TOTAL PURCHASE COST AT PAR 03.02.2006 92070 10/ - 9.86 908000 03.02.2006 5000 10/- 10/_ 50000 03.02.2006 200 10/- 10/- 2000 TOTAL 97270 960000 A.Y. 2009-10 DATE OF PURCHASE NO. OF SHARES PURCHASED FACE VALUE PER SHARE PER SHARE PURCHASE COST TOTAL PURCHASE COST AT PAR 22.11.2008 1473005 10/- 10/- 14730050 4.2 THE OPENING NUMBER OF SHARES AS ON 01.04.2009 W ERE 15,17,275 OUT OF WHICH IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ASSESSEE SOLD TOTAL 15,27,000 AS RS.10/- PER SHARE TO M/S. M AYANK ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 5 MEDILAB (P) LTD., THE SHARES SOLD WERE ONLY 5 LAC A ND BALANCE 10,27,000 SHARES WERE SOLD TO OTHER PARTIES. ALL TH E SHARES WERE SOLD AT THE SAME VALUE OF RS.10/- PER SHARE. T HE DETAILS ARE AS UNDER: DATE NO. OF SHARES SOLD SALE VALUE PER SHARE TOTAL SALE VALUE SOLD TO 13.06.2009 260000 10/ - 2600000 OTHERS 13.06.2009 767000 10/- 7670000 OTHERS 12.06.2009 500000 10/- 5000000 M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB TOTAL 1527000 15270000 4.3 HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT DOUBTED GENUINENESS OF SALE OF 10,27,000 SHARES TO PARTIES OTHER THAN M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB (P) LTD. AND ADDED O NLY SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.50 LAC RECEIVED ON SALE OF 5 LA C SHARES TO M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB (P) LTD. THIS WAS DONE ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGA TION WING THAT SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR JINDAL, SHRI PREM ARORA GRO UP, SHRI SAJJAN KUMAR JAIN AND SHRI PAWAN ARYA AND HIS FAMIL Y MEMBERS WERE FOUND TO HAVE INDULGED IN THE ACTIVITY OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY AND ASSESSEE WAS ONE OF THE BENEFICIARIES FOR RECEIPT OF RS.69 LAC FROM THE SAI D GROUP OF ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 6 PERSONS. HE OBSERVED THAT THE INFORMATION RECEIVED WAS THAT THESE PARTIES WERE INVOLVED IN PROVIDING BOGUS ACCOPMMODATION ENTRY AND BOGUS EXEMPT LONG TERM CAP ITAL GAIN IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOT IN DIS PUTE THAT THERE IS NO CASE OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. RS. 50 LAC OUT OF RS.69 LAC WAS RECEIVED AS SALE CONSIDERATION OF 5 L AC SHARES OF M/S. SHRI GANGA PAPER MILL (P) LTD. WHICH WERE HELD SINCE PAST BY THE ASSESSEE, I.E., PARTLY FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND PARTLY FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE HOLDIN G OF SHARES HAS NEVER BEEN DOUBTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER. HE OBSERVED THAT IN THIS YEAR 10,27,000 NUMBER OF SHAR ES OF THE SAME COMPANY AND PRACTICALLY AT THE SAME POINT OF T IME AND AT THE SAME VALUE WERE SOLD TO THE PARTIES OTHER TH EN M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB (P) LTD. AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER H AS NOT DOUBTED THE SAID SALE TRANSACTIONS. THE ASSESSEE HA S FILED COPY OF SALE INVOICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSEE TO M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB (P) LTD. SHOWING SALE OF 5 LAC SHARES. THE COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB (P) LTD. IN T HE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE, THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE, THE B ALANCE ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 7 SHEET AND THE DETAILS OF SHARE HOLDINGS OF THE ASSE SSEE AS ON 31.03.2009 AND THE BALANCE SHEET AND THE HOLDINGS O F SHARES AS ON 31.03.2010 IN THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE WHICH ALL DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD CLEARLY PROVES THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4.4 LD. CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE WAS H AVING THE CAPITAL OF RS.50,00,000/- IN THE SHAPE OF 5 LAC NUM BER OF SHARES OF M/S SHRI GANGA PAPER MILLS (P) LTD., PART LY FROM A.Y. 2006-07 AND PARTLY FROM A.Y.2009-10, AND THE SAME H OLDING HAS NEVER BEING DOUBTED WHICH WAS BEING LIQUIDATED IN THIS YEAR AT THE FACE VALUE ITSELF BROUGHT IN RS.50,00,0 00/- FROM THE PURCHASER OF THOSE SHARES BEING M/S MAYANK MEDI LAB (P) LTD., AND THE SAME HAS BEEN GIVEN VIDE TWO RTGS OF RS.25,00,000/- EACH, STOOD CREDITED IN THE ICICI BA NK OF THE ASSESSEE ON 13.06.09. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT WHEN THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF BALANCE 10,27,000 NUMBER OF SHARES OF THE SAME COMPANY, AT THE SAME POINT OF TIME, AT THE SAM E VALUE, STANDS ACCEPTED BY THE A.O, HE FOUND NO REASON FOR NOT ACCEPTING THE SALE OF 5,00,000 SIMILAR SHARES TO M/ S MAYANK ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 8 MEDILAB (P) LTD. AT THE SAME POINT OF TIME. HE OBSE RVED THAT HE ALSO DID NOT FIND ANY SPECIFIC COGENT EVIDENCE ON R ECORD IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION OF THE A.O. THAT THIS SAL E TRANSACTION OF SHARES FOR RS.50,00,000/- IS NOT THE GENUINE TRA NSACTION. IN RESPECT OF RS.19,00,000/- RECEIVED IN EXCESS FROM M /S MAYANK MEDILAB (P) LTD., WHICH AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED THROUGH RTGS ON 13.06.09, HE FOUND JUSTIFICATION IN THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT UNDER SOME CONFUSION OF SALE OF MORE SHARES, THE SAID RS.19,00,000/- WERE ALSO GIVEN BY M/S MAYA NK MEDILAB (P) LTD. TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE SAID AMOUNT WAS RETURNED BACK IMMEDIATELY BY THE ASSESSEE ON TH E 2ND DAY I.E. ON 15.06.09, THEREFORE, NO BENEFIT WAS REC EIVED ON ACCOUNT OF RECEIPT OF SAID SUM OF RS.19,00,000/-. H E FURTHER OBSERVED THAT UNDER THESE FACTS WHEN THE MONEY STOO D RETURNED ON THE 2ND DAY, TOTALLY UNUTILIZED AND WIT HOUT TAKING ANY BENEFIT OF ANY NATURE OUT OF THE SAID RECEIPT, SUCH RECEIPTS CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD OR TAKEN AS RECEIPT OF ACCOMMO DATION IN NATURE. IN CASE OF ANY ACCOMMODATION ENTRY, THE REC IPIENTS WILL SURELY ENJOY THE BENEFITS OF THE SAID RECEIPT, WHICH IS NOT A ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 9 CASE HERE. REGARDING THE OBSERVATION OF REPORT FROM THE INV. WING, HE OBSERVED THAT HE FOUND SUBSTANCE IN THE CO NTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT WHEN SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED, T HE CROSS EXAMINATION OF THE PERSON WAS TO BE REQUIRED, SINCE THE STATEMENTS OF SUCH PERSONS HAVE BEEN RELIED UPON AN D ACTED UPON BY THE A.O., SPECIALLY WHEN THESE STATEMENTS W ERE RECORDED AT THE BACK OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT TOO, NOT BY THE A.O. BUT BY THE INV. WING. LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT HE HAS SEEN THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE A.O. HAS SPE CIFICALLY REJECTED THE REQUEST OF CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE AS SESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS ONLY A SECONDARY AND SUBORDI NATE MATERIAL, THEREFORE, THE CROSS-EXAMINATION WAS NOT NECESSARY. LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE A.O. FOR REJECTION OF PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE AS KING FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION. IN THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT ORDER, HE FOUND THAT ONLY SUBSTANTIVE MATERIAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO THIS AMOUNT WAS THE REPORT OF INVESTIGATION WING WH ICH WAS BASED ON THE STATEMENTS OF 3RD PARTIES, RECORDED BE HIND THE BACK OF THE ASSESSEE AND WHICH HAVE BEEN USED ADVER SELY. IN ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 10 THAT CASE, AS PER THE SETTLED LAW, IN CASE, THE ASS ESSEE, DEMANDS FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION, IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE A.O. TO FACILITATE FOR THE CROSS-EXAMINATION IN THE ABSENCE OF WHICH, SUCH ALLEGED ADVERSE MATERIAL CANNOT BE USED. THIS LEGAL PREPOSITION STANDS LAID DOWN BY HON'BLE SUPREME IN THE CASE OF M/S. ANDAMAN TIMBER INDUSTRIES, 281 CTR 241 (SC) . THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD AS THAT 'DENIAL OF OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO CROSS-EXAMINE THE WI TNESSES WHOSE STATEMENTS WERE MADE THE SOLE BASIS OF THE AS SESSMENT IS A SERIOUS FLAW RENDERING THE ORDER A NULLITY INA SMUCH AS IT AMOUNTED TO VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUST ICE'. 4.5 LD. CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT HE FOUND SUBSTANC E IN THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IT IS NOWHERE MENTIONED THAT THE TRANSACTION UNDER CONSID ERATION HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY STATED BY THE SAID PERSONS AS IN THE NATURE OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. HE OBSERVED THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, NO COGNIZANCE OF SUCH INFORMATION AND STATEMENTS COLLECTED BEHIND THE BAC K OF THE ASSESSEE CAN BE USED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. HE OBSER VED THAT ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 11 HE EXAMINED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ON ITS MERITS, IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE ANY CAPITAL OR ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OF RS.50,0 0,000/- HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SINCE THE SAID SU M REPRESENTS THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF SHARES OF SAME VALUE WHICH ALREADY EXISTED IN RECORDS AND HAD BEEN COMIN G FROM EARLIER YEARS. SIMILARLY RS.19,00,000/- RECEIVED ON 13.06.09 WERE RETURNED ON 15.06.09 THEREBY NO BENEFIT AND HA S BEEN DERIVED FROM THIS RECEIPT ALSO. HENCE HE HELD THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR HOLDING THE RECEIPT OF RS.69,00,0 00/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND ACCORDINGLY DELETED THE SAME. LEARNED DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE O RDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPO RTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ALSO PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE INSTANT CA SE, THE UNDISPUTED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER REC EIVED INFORMATION FROM INVESTIGATION WING, NEW DELHI THAT SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION WAS CARRIED OUT ON SHRI PRADE EP KUMAR JINDAL, SHRI SAJAN KUMAR JAIN, SHRI PREM ARORA AND SHRI ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 12 PAWAN ARYA AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS WHO WERE ENTRY PR OVIDERS. THEY PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES BY WAY OF BOGUS SHARE PREMIUM, EXEMPT LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND ADVANCE AGAINST PROPERTY ETC FROM NON-DESCRIPT COMPANIES AN D THE ASSESSEE, SMT. REETA SINGHAL WAS ONE OF THE BENEFIC IARY WHO HAS RECEIVED ACCOMMODATION ENTRY AMOUNTING TO RS.69 LAC. ON A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESS EE THAT IT RECEIVED RS.50 LAC TOWARDS SALE CONSIDERATION OF SH ARES OF SHRI GANGA PAPER MILLS PVT. LTD. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 0-11. THE SAID SHARES WERE ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE AS SESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2009-10 AND WERE ALREADY APPEARIN G IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINE D THAT THE SAID PURCHASER M/S. MAYANK MEDILAB PVT. LTD. UNDER A MISTAKE THAT IT WAS ACQUIRING FURTHER SHARES FROM T HE ASSESSEE PAID RS.19 LAC ON 13.06.2009 AND THE SAME WAS RETUR NED BACK BY THE ASSESSEE ON 15.06.2005 AND THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT DERIVE BENEFIT OF RS.19 LAC AS AN ACCOMMODATION ENT RY. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NOWHERE IT HAS BEEN STATED IN THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATI ON WING THAT ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 13 THEY HAD PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION ENTRY TO THE ASSESS EE, SMT. REETA SINGHAL. FURTHER, HE REQUESTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PROVIDE CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE MAKER OF THE STATE MENT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DENIED THE SAME AND ADDED RS.69 L AC TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U /S.68 OF THE ACT. 6. ON APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION MAINL Y ON THE GROUND THAT THE SUM OF RS.50 LAC RECEIVED BY THE AS SESSEE WAS TOWARDS SALE CONSIDERATION OF SHARES OF M/S. SHRI G ANGA PAPER MILLS PVT. LTD. AT FACE VALUE ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT EARNED ANY CAPITAL GAIN. THE SHARES ALREADY EXISTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEA RS 2006- 07 AND 2009-10. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ALLOW ED CROSS- EXAMINATION OF THE MAKER OF THE STATEMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OF RS.69 LAC IN THE GU ISE OF SALE CONSIDERATION OF SHARES, AND THEREFORE, THE STATEME NT OF THE PERSONS CANNOT BE USED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE FOR MAK ING ADDITION U/S.68 OF THE ACT AND RELIED UPON THE DECI SION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. ANDAMAN T IMBER ITA NO.4819/DEL/2018 14 INDUSTRIES (SUPRA). NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE DEPARTMENT TO SHOW THAT THE ABOVE FINDINGS OF T HE LD. CIT(A) ARE NOT CORRECT. EVEN OTHERWISE, NO SPECIFIC ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) COULD BE POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE. HENCE, WE FIND NO GOOD R EASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS HEREBY CONFIRMED AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON THIS DAY, THE 17/0 1/2019. SD/- SD/- (KULDIP SINGH) (N. S. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17/01/2019 PRABHAT KUMAR KESARWANI, SR.P.S.