ITO, New Delhi V. M/s. SSL Energy Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5810/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 581020114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 05-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 16-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SAHAY
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJIV BANSAL
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 5810/ DEL/ 2012 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. N O. 5810/DEL/2012 A.Y. : 2005 - 06 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(2), ROOM NO. 180, CR BUILDING, NEW DELHI VS. M/S SSL ENERGY LTD., 43 - B, MIG FLATS, DISLSHAD GARDENS, NEW DELHI (PAN: AAGCS9959R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. VIKRAM SAHAY, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SH. RAJIV BANSAL, CA DATE OF HEARING : 05 - 11 - 2014 DATE OF ORDER : 10 - 11 - 2014 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : J M TH IS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) - X II , NEW DELHI DATED 30.8.2012 P ERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,50,00,000/ - UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 5810/ DEL/ 2012 2 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES, LEAVE OR RESERVING THE RIGHT TO AMEND MODIFY, ALTER, ADD OR FOREGO ANY GROUND OF APPEAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE ARE NOT IN DISPUTE BY BOTH THE PARTIES, THEREFORE, NOT REPEATING THE SAME HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 4. AT TH E TIME OF HEARING, SH. VIKRAM SAHAY, DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER . ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND STATED THAT LD. CIT(A) S ORDER MAY BE UPHELD. 5 . WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ELABORATELY DISCUSSED THE ISSUE IN QUESTION AND ADJUDICATED THE SAME AS UNDER: - I HAVE PERUSED THE FACTS STATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WE LL AS THE FACTS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS SUBMISSIONS. THE ADDITION OF RS. 2.50 CRORE U/S. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF NON FILING OF COPY OF CONTRACT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVIDE A COPY O F THE CONTRACT W.R,T, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION. IN THIS REGARD ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT ALL THE TRANSACTIONS WERE ROUTED THROUGH BANK IN G CHANNEL AND ALL THREE PARTIES HAD SUFFICIENT CREDIT BALANCE ON 31.3.2005 AND ON 30.3.2006 BEFORE MAKING PAYMENTS. T HE ACCOUNTS OF ALL THREE PARTIES ARE IN ITA NO. 5810/ DEL/ 2012 3 HDFC BANK WHERE FROM THE TRANSACTIONS WERE ROUTED AND OTHER DETAILS ARE GIVEN AND ARE IN CONFORMITY TO THE BANK STATEMENT OF RESPECTIVE PARTIES. THUS, THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES I S PROVED. THE TRANSACTIONS ARE ACCOUNTING JUGGLERY AND CANNOT BE SUBJECT TO ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 3387/DEL/2009 IN THE ASSESSEE OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 22.3.2009 HAS TREATED THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICALLY PURPOSE. KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE FACTS AS STATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO MONEY TRANSACTION ONLY AN ACCOUNTING JUGGLERY THERE IS NO FINANCIAL INV OLVEMENT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED IN DETAIL ALL THE TRANSACTIONS HENCE THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AMOUNTING TO RS. 2.50 CRORES U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT IS HEREBY DELE TED AND ASSESEE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 5.1 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE FIND CONSIDERABLE FORCE IN THE VIEW TAKEN BY LD. CIT(A) THAT THERE IS NO MONEY TRANSACTION ONLY ON ACCOUNTING JUGGLERY THERE IS NO FINANCIAL INVOLVEMENT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED IN D ETAIL ALL THE TRANSACTIONS, HENCE, THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. THEREFORE, WE FIND LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 2.50 CRORES U/S. 68 ITA NO. 5810/ DEL/ 2012 4 OF THE I.T. ACT, WHICH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART, H ENCE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE O PEN C OURT ON 1 0 / 11 /20 1 4 . SD/ - SD/ - [ T.S. KAPOOR ] [ H.S. SIDHU ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 1 0 / 11 /201 4 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES ITA NO. 5810/ DEL/ 2012 5