ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI V. ITO WARD - 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6171/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7025 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 19-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM TIWARIDR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 68; 144

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES H, MUMBAI , . , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2000-01 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PVT. LTD. 302, STANDARD HOUSE, 83, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400002 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 ( ! ' # /ASSESSEE) ( $ / REVENUE) P.A. NO.AABCA1949A !' # / ASSESSEE BY SHRI SASHANK DUNDU $ / REVENUE BY SHRI RAM TIWARI-DR % $& ' # ( / DATE OF HEARING : 04/06/2018 ' # ( / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04/06/2018 ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 2 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29/07/2016 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORI TY, MUMBAI, CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS.21,50,000/- IM POSED UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT) ON THE ADDITION OF RS.55,71,4 80/- MADE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 2. DURING HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E, SHRI SASHANK DUNDU, CONTENDED THAT THE QUANTUM ON T HE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY WAS IMPOSED HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 19/08/2016 (ITA NO.7556/MUM2012). THIS FACTUAL MATRIX WAS NOT CONTROVERTED BY LD. DR, SHRI RAM TIWARI. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN VIEW O F THE ABOVE, WE ARE REPRODUCING HEREUNDER THE RELEVANT PO RTION FROM THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 19/0 8/2016 FOR READY REFERENCE AND ANALYSIS:- ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 3 THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAIN ING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORD ER PASSED BY CIT(A)-4, MUMBAI DATED 11/10/2012, WHICH IN TUR N ARISES OUT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UN DER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 254 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (I N SHORT THE ACT) DATED 29/12/2011. 2. INITIALLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED MULTIPLE GRO UNDS OF APPEAL IN MEMO OF APPEAL, BUT SUBSEQUENTLY, IT HAS FILED REVISED GROUNDS OF APPEAL, WHICH READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT I NCREASE IN SUNDRY CREDITORS OF RS.55,71,480/- BEING EXPENDITURE INCU RRED IN EARLIER YEARS BY TENANTS NAMELY MR. SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA AND SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARIA ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE COMPANY WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED ITS ONUS U/S 68 AND HENCE A DDITION OF RS.55,71,480/- U/S.68 MAY BE DELETED. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR DELETE ANY OR ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3. APART THEREFROM, ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN ADD ITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL, WHICH READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IN CREASE IN SUNDRY CREDITORS OF RS.55,71,480/- BEING EXPENDITURE INCUR RED IN EARLIER YEARS BY TENANTS NAMELY MR. SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA AND SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARIA ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESEE COMPANY CANNOT BE ADDED UNDER SECTION 68 AS NON SUM IS CREDITED IN ASSESSEE BOO KS OF ACCOUNTS AS REQUIRED BY S.68. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR DELETE ANY OR ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3.1 IN SUPPORT OF ITS ADMISSION, IT HAS BEEN CANVAS SED THAT IT IS A LEGAL GROUND AND IS PERMISSIBLE TO BE RAISE D FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME C OURT IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL THERMAL POWER COMPANY VS. CIT, 229 ITR 383(SC). 4. THE SOLITARY DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO T HE ACTION OF THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES IN HOLDING THAT A SUM OF RS.55,71,480/- REPRESENTING INCREASE IN SUNDRY C REDITORS AS AT ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 4 THE END OF THE YEAR WAS AN UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT , WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 4.1 A BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE DISPUTE CAN BE SUMMAR IZED AS FOLLOWS. THE APPELLANT IS A COMPANY INCORPORATED U NDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND IS ENGAGE D IN THE BUSINESS OF INVESTMENTS. IT FILED A RETURN OF INCO ME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 ON 31/10/2001 DECLARING A L OSS OF RS.47,403/- AND IN AN EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT MADE UNDE R SECTION 144 OF THE ACT ON 29/01/2004, THE TOTAL INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS.65,95,690/-. IN SUCH ASSESSMENT INCREASE IN THE SUNDRY CREDITORS OF RS.55,71,480/- WAS HELD TO BE AN UNEX PLAINED CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. WHEN SUCH ASSE SSMENT WAS CARRIED IN APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT THE INCREASED BALANCE OF SUNDRY CREDITORS REPRESENT ED AMOUNT DUE TO TWO OF ITS TENANTS, NAMELY, SHRI. SURESH C HANDRA TAPARIA AND SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARIA TO WHOM ASS ESSEE HAD GIVEN ITS FLAT AT BENHOR APARTMENTS, MUMBAI ON RENT. THE AFORESAID INCREASE REFLECTED AMOUNT CREDITED TO SHR I SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA - RS.33,11,052/- AND SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARIA -RS.32,23,184/- FOR THE EXPENSES INCURRED B Y THEM ON THE CIVIL RENOVATION WORK OF THE FLAT RENTED OUT. BEFORE CIT(A), ASSESSEE FILED DETAILS LIKE CONFIRMATIONS, BOARD RESOLUTIONS, BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME RETURNS OF SU CH SUNDRY CREDITORS, ETC. IN SUPPORT OF THE CREDITS IN QUESTI ON. AFTER OBTAINING A REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER, THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION, WHICH WAS CARRIED IN A PPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY THE REVENUE. THE TRIBUNAL V IDE ITS ORDER DATED 9/2/2011 NOTICED THAT ADEQUATE OPPORTUN ITY WAS ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 5 NOT ALLOWED BY THE CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THE MATTER WAS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A FRESH DECISION. FOLLOWING THE SAID DIRECTION OF THE TRIB UNAL THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WH EREBY THE AMOUNT CREDITED TO THE TWO CREDITORS, NAMELY SHRI. SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA AND SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARIA AMOU NTING TO RS.55,71,480/- HAS BEEN HELD TO BE UNEXPLAINED UNDE R SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 4.2 BEFORE CIT(A), ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE NA TURE AND SOURCE OF THE IMPUGNED CREDITS WAS DULY EXPLAINED O N THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AND EVIDENCE AVAILABLE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS ASSERTED THAT LETTERS FROM THE AFO RESAID CREDITORS, INCOME TAX RETURNS, BALANCE SHEET REFLEC TING AMOUNTS DUE TO THEM FROM THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, THEIR CONFIR MATION LETTERS AND THEIR STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS SHOWING DET AILS OF THE PAYEES WITH CHEQUE NUMBERS AND AMOUNT OF EXPENDITU RE INCURRED BY THEM FOR RENOVATION OF THE AFORESAID FL AT, ETC., COMPLETELY EXPLAINED THE CREDITS IN TERMS OF SECT ION 68 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT IN RESPONS E TO NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 133( 6) OF THE ACT THE TWO CREDITORS APPEARED AND CONFIRMED THE TR ANSACTIONS. THE CIT(A) HAS DULY NOTED THE SUBMISSIONS PUT FOR TH BY THE ASSESSEE BUT HE HAS ULTIMATELY OBSERVED THAT THE IMPUGNED CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT COULD NOT BE SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED AND HENCE, UPHELD THE ADDI TION MADE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. AS PER THE CIT(A), TH E COPIES OF BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITORS WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHI CH COULD ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 6 PROVE THE CAPACITY OF THE TWO CREDITORS. AGAINST SUCH A DECISION OF THE CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPE AL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESS EE VEHEMENTLY POINTED OUT THAT THE DETAILS SUBMITTED B Y THE ASSESSEE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THE IDENTITY AND CREDI TWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS AS ALSO THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRA NSACTIONS. IN THIS CONTEXT, ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE VARIOUS DETAILS SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPUGNED CREDIT SHOW T HAT THE SAME REFLECTED ONLY INCREASE IN THE BALANCE OF T HE CREDITORS AND WAS ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CRE DITORS ON REPAIRS OF THE PREMISES DURING THE PERIOD 1992-93 T O 1996-97. IN PARTICULAR, ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO THE FOLLOWI NG DETAILS PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK TO JUSTIFY THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE CREDITS:- I. DETAILS OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AS ON 31/3/2000 II. DETAILS OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AS ON 31/3/1999 III. BALANCE SHEET OF THE COMPANY AS ON 31/3/2000 IV. COPY OF BOARD RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS V. COPY OF LETTER BY SHRI SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA DT.4/ 11/2011 VI. COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT SUBMITTED BY SHRI SURE SH CHANDRA TAPARIA VII. COPY OF LETTER DT. 8/7/1 999 SUBMITTED BY SHRI SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA VIII. COPY OF BALANCE CONFIRMATION BY SHRI SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA IX. COPY OF I.T ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SHRI SURESH TAPARIA FOR THE A.Y 1999-2000 X. COPY OF BALANCE SHEET OF SHRI SURESH TAPARIA AS ON 31/3/1999. XI. COPY OF BY SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARIA DT. 4/11/2011 XII. COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT SUBMITTED BY SMT. SRIK ANTA DEVI TAPARIA XIII. COPY OF LETTER DT.8/7/1999 SUBMITTED BY SMT.SRIKANT A DEVI TAPARIA XIV. COPY OF BALANCE CONFIRMATION BY SMT. SRIKAN TA DEVI TAPARIA XV. COPY OF I.T. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SMT. SRIKANTA DEVEI ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 7 TAPARIA FOR THE A.Y 1999 - 2000. XVI. COPY OF BALANCE SHEET OF SMT.SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARAIA AS ON 31/3/1999. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE POINTED OUT THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE , THE CIT(A) HAS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT THE CLINCHING E VIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE CREDITORS THR OUGH WHICH THE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED; AND, THE RE LEVANT BILLS OF THE REPAIR EXPENSES ETC. WERE NOT PRODUCED AND, THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED CREDITS COULD NOT BE CONSID ERED AS EXPLAINED WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 68 OF THE A CT. 7. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE CONTROVERSY REVOLVES AROUND T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT, WHICH HAS BEEN INVOKED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TREAT A SUM OF RS.55,71 ,480/- AS AN UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. SECTION 68 OF THE ACT, PRESCRIBES THAT WHERE ANY SUM IS FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF AN ASSESSEE FOR ANY PREVIOUS YEAR AND ASSESSEE O FFERS NO EXPLANATION ABOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE THEREOF OR THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY HIM IS NOT FOUND SATISFACTOR Y BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEN THE SUM SO CREDITED MAY BE CHARGED TO INCOME TAX AS INCOME OF THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YE AR. QUITE CLEARLY, SECTION 68 OF THE ACT EMPOWERS THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO CALL UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE NA TURE AND SOURCE OF ANY SUM FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS. IT IS QUITE WELL SETTLED THAT THE ONUS CAST UPON THE ASSESSEE U NDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT CAN BE DISCHARGED IF AN ASSES SEE IS ABLE TO IDENTIFY THE CREDITOR, ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTH INESS OF THE CREDITOR AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. I N THE ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 8 INSTANT CASE, ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD RENTED ITS PREMI SES TO SHRI. SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA AND SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPARIA. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED AN INCREASE IN THE AMOUNTS CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE SUNDRY CREDITORS BY A SUM OF RS.55, 71,480/-. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE TWO TENAN TS HAD INCURRED EXPENSES ON CIVIL RENOVATION WORK OF THE P ROPERTY DURING THE FINANCIAL YEARS 1992-93 TO 1996-97. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THAT INITIALLY IT DID NOT ACCEPT THE CLAIMS AS THE PARTIES WERE NOT PAYING RENTS, BUT LATER ON ACCEPTE D THE AFORESAID CLAIMS IN TERMS OF ITS BOARD OF DIRECTORS RESOLUTION DATED 18/02/2000. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED BEFOR E THE LOWER AUTHORITIES THAT IN PURSUANCE TO SUCH RESOLUT ION, IT CAPITALIZED THE AFORESAID AMOUNT INCURRED BY THE A FORESAID TWO CREDITORS BY DEBITING IT TO THE BUILDING ACCOU NT AND CREDITING THE SAME TO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE TWO CREDI TORS, SHRI. SURESH CHANDRA TAPARIA AND SMT. SRIKANTA DEVI TAPAR IA. IN SUPPORT, ASSESSEE FURNISHED A COPY OF THE COMMUNICA TION OF THE TWO CREDITORS, COPIES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK AT PAGES 41 - 42 AND 55-56. IN TERMS OF SUCH COMMUNICATION, THE TWO CREDITORS HAVE EXPLAINED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE DETAILS OF EXPENDITURE INCURR ED ON CIVIL RENOVATION WORK ON THE TENANTED PROPERTY DURI NG THE PERIOD 1/4/1993 TO 31/3/1997. THE SAID CORRESPONDE NCE ALSO DETAILS THE PAYMENT MADE THROUGH CHEQUES AND THE NA MES OF THE RECIPIENTS OF THE CHEQUES. THE CREDITORS HAD A LSO FURNISHED COPIES OF THE BALANCE SHEET AND THE INCOM E TAX RETURNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000, SHOWING THE ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 9 AMOUNTS AS ADVANCED AGAINST THE TENANTED PROPERTY. THE COPIES OF INCOME TAX RETURN FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 20 09-10 AND 2010-11 HAVE ALSO BEEN PLACED BEFORE THE ASSESS ING OFFICER. BE THAT AS IT MAY, THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ALSO SUGGESTS THAT IN THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICES UNDER SECTION 133( 6) OF THE ACT, THE TWO CREDITORS DULY CONFIRMED THE GENUINENE SS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. 7.1 THE STAND OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE CREDITORS COULD NOT FURNISH COPIES OF THEIR RESPECTIVE BANK STATEMENTS, WHICH REFLECTED PAYMENTS MADE BY THEM TOWARDS THE RENOVAT ION EXPENSES OF THE TENANTED PROPERTY. THE AFORESAID O BJECTION HAS BEEN THE BASIS FOR THE CIT(A) AS WELL AS THE AS SESSING OFFICER TO TREAT THE AFORESAID CREDITS AS UNEXPLAIN ED WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. IN OUR CONSI DERED OPINION, FROM THE MATERIAL AND EVIDENCE ON RECORD, THE COMPLETE DETAILS OF THE IMPUGNED CREDITS WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE TWO CREDIT ORS RESPONDED TO THE ENQUIRIES CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTIONS. THERE IS N O MATERIAL LED BY THE REVENUE TO SHOW THAT ANY OF THE EVIDENCE S PRODUCED BEFORE HIM WAS WRONG OR OTHERWISE NOT CRED IBLE. THE EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, AS ALSO BY THE TWO CREDITORS HAVE BEEN MERELY DISBELIEVED AND IT I S NOT A CASE WHERE ANY OF THE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE FALSE OR UNTRUE. FACTUALLY SPEAKING, IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS COMPLETELY DISCHARGED THE INITIAL BURD EN CAST ON IT TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE CRE DITS. THE ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 10 ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN ASSESSEE AND ITS TENANTS BY WAY OF THE TENANCY AGREEMENT, COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK PAGES 75 TO 79 WAS ALSO BEFORE THE ASSES SING OFFICER. THE ONUS THAT IS CAST UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT IS NOT STATIC, INASMUCH AS IT SHIFTS TO THE REVENUE DEPENDING ON THE MATERIAL AND EVIDENCE LED BY THE ASSESSEE AT A GIVEN STAGE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD BEFORE HIM THE AV ERMENTS OF THE SUNDRY CREDITORS, THE INCOME TAX DETAILS OF THE SUNDRY CREDITORS, THE BALANCE SHEETS OF THE TWO CREDITORS WHICH SHOWED THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION, ETC. BY MERELY POI NTING OUT THAT FURTHER EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF BANK AC COUNT OF THE CREDITORS WAS NOT AVAILABLE, DOES NOT DISTRACT FROM THE FACT THAT WHATEVER EVIDENCE THAT WAS ON RECORD BEFO RE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BEEN FOUND UNTRUE OR FALS E BY HIM. THEREFORE, IN SO FAR AS THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED, IT HAS COMPLETELY DISCHARGED ITS ONUS OF EXPLAINING THE N ATURE AND SOURCE OF THE CREDITS IN QUESTION AND SUCH EXPLANAT ION STOOD CORROBORATED BY THE TWO CREDITORS. CONSIDERING THE ENTIRETY OF CIRCUMSTANCES, IN OUR VIEW, THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HAS MERELY PROCEEDED TO DISBELIEVE THE EVIDENCE LED BY THE ASSESSEE AND NOT MADE ANY EFFORT TO ESTABLISH ANY F ALSITY OR UNTRUTH IN THE SAME. THEREFORE, UNDER THESE CIRCUM STANCES, IN OUR VIEW, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS WRONG IN HOL DING THAT THE EXPLANATION RENDERED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS N OT SATISFACTORY WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 68 OF TH E ACT. THUS WE SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DIREC T THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.55,7 1,480/- MADE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 11 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED, AS ABOVE. 2.2. WE FIND THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT WITH RESPECT T O UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND CONSEQUENTLY IMPOSED PENALTY UNDER SECT ION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE AFORESAID O RDER DATED 19/08/2016 FOUND THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE SATISFACTORY AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCHARGED THE ONUS EXPLAINING THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF SUCH CREDITS IN QUESTION AND SUCH EXPLANATION STOOD CORROBORATED BY TWO CREDITORS AND FINALLY DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICE R TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.55,71,480/- MADE UNDER SECTION 6 8 OF THE ACT. SINCE, THE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF WHICH PENALTY WAS IMPOSED REMAINED NO MORE IN EXISTENCE, THE PENA LTY WILL NOT SURVIVE. OUR VIEW FIND SUPPORT FROM THE DE CISION IN K.C. BUILDERS VS ACIT (2004) 265 ITR 562 (SC) AND T HE RATIO LAID DOWN IN CIT VS S.P. VIZ, 176 ITR 76 (PAT NA). EVEN OTHERWISE, WHEN THE QUANTUM ADDITION IS DELETED, TH ERE REMAINS NO BASIS AT ALL FOR LEVYING THE PENALTY FOR CONCEALMENT OR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS, B ECAUSE, OF ITS OWN, THE PENALTY CANNOT STAND ON ITS LEGS WH EN ITA NO.6171/MUM/2016 ANJANI AGRICO IMPLEMENTS PRIVATE LTD. 12 ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE PENALTY WAS IMPO SED REMAINS NO MORE IN EXISTENCE. THUS, WE DIRECT THE L D. ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE PENALTY. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 04/06/2018. SD/- (G. MANJUNATHA) SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER % & MUMBAI; - DATED : 04/06/2018 F{X~{T? P.S/. .. , %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ./01 / THE APPELLANT 2. 2301 / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 4 4 % 5# , ( ./ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 4 4 % 5# / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 7$8 2# , 4 ./( . , % & / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 9! :& / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , % & / ITAT, MUMBAI