Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur V. M/s Enrich Engineering Works (P), Kanpur

ITA 670/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6553 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-04-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 09-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K RAM
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Onus to prove
• Section: 133(6); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 670/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE - II KANPUR V. M/S ENRICH ENG INEERING WROKS (P) LTD. KANPUR PAN: (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. R. K. RAM, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING: 24 04 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12 05 2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS AP PEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2.95 CRORES MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED IN SHORT THE ACT') AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. 2 . THE FACTS IN BRIEF BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORD ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED FROM THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY ENDING ON 31.3.2008 THAT THERE WAS A CREDIT BALANCE OF RS.2.95 CRORES IN THE NAME OF M /S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. IN THE ASSESSEES BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE SAID DEPOSITS, BY WAY OF FILING COPY OF ACCOUNT OF THE DEPOSITOR ALONG WITH PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : CONFIRMATION. IN RESPONS E THERETO , IT WAS EXPLAINED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AFORESAID SUM WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. ON ACCOUNT OF PROSPECTIVE PURCHASES BY THE SAID COMPANY OF THE GOODS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY. IT WAS A LSO EXPLAINED THAT A SUM OF RS.1 CRORE SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN CREDITED IN THE ACCOUNT M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD.S ACCOUNT ON 28.3.2008 ACTUALLY REPRESENTED PAYMENT RECEIVED FROM M/S J.D. INTERNATIONAL, BOMBAY WHICH WAS INADVERTENTLY ENTERED IN THE ACCOUN T OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. AS CREDIT AND THE ENTRY WAS REVERSED ON 27.12.2008, THE NEXT FINANCIAL YEAR IN FAVOUR OF M/S J. D. INTERNATIONAL, BOMBAY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER NOTICED FROM THE COPY OF THE ACCOUNT OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. IN THE ASSESSEES BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007 - 08 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SOLD ANY GOODS TO THE SAID CONCERN , INSTEAD IT HAS PURCHASED GOODS FROM THE SAID CONCERN FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.1.30 CRORES. THE DETAILS OF THIS AMOUNT AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION FOR THE PURPOSE AND GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION WITH M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD., THE VERIFICATION AND CONFIRMATION OF SUCH ACCOUNT WAS REQUIRED FROM M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. VIDE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) OF THE A CT DATED 21.10.2010. FROM THE LOCAL ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD., IT WAS REVEALED ON ENQUIRY THAT NO SUCH COMPANY HAS ANY EXISTENCE OVER THERE. NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) OF THE ACT DATED 24.11.2010 WA S AGAIN SENT TO THE HEAD OFFICE OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD., PLOT NO.9, SPECTRA COMPOUND KANCHPADA, 11, MALAD WEST, MUMBAI 400064, BUT NO COMMUNICATION FROM THE SAID M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. WAS RECEIVED. IN THE ABSENCE OF PROPER VERIFICATIO N, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TREATED THIS CREDIT TO BE UN EXPLAINED. 3 . IT IS ALSO NOTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. HAVE PURCHASED ASSETS OF M/S PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : RAJENDRA STEEL LTD. ( IN LIQUIDATION) FROM THE OFFICIAL L IQUIDATOR. M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. HAD PURCHASED PLANT AND MACHINERY OF M/S RAJENDRA STEEL LTD. ( IN LIQUIDATION) FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.8 CRORES AND LAND & BUILDING WAS PURCHASED BY M/S ENRICH ENGINEERING WORKS PVT. LTD. FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.5.5 CRORES. THE TRANSACTION SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT RELATE S TO M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. THEREFORE, M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE LTD. , WHICH PURCHASED THE PLANT AND MACHINERY OF M/S RAJENDRA STEEL LTD. ( IN LIQUIDATI O N) FROM THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR , WAS DIFFERENT ENTITY AS COMPARED TO M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. , WHOSE ACCOUNTS ARE APPEARING IN THE ASSESSEES BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, DID NOT ACCEPT THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. IN ORDER TO MAKE PURCHASES OF ASSETS OF M/S RAJENDRA STEEL LTD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCORDINGLY TREATED THE CREDIT BALANCE SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. 4 . AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND FILED CONFIRMATION FOR THE CREDIT BALANCE WHICH WAS SENT THROUGH FAX DIRECTLY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. THE LD. CIT(A) CALLED COMMENTS FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER O N THIS ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBJECTED TO THE ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WITH THE CONTENTION THAT IT WAS RECEIVED IN HIS OFFICE AFTER COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT. THE LD. CIT(A) AGAIN ASKED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE COMMENTS O N MERIT OF THE CASE. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH WAS REPRODUCED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER AND HAVING TAK EN INTO ACCOUNT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITIO N. WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSING PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 4 - : OFFICER SHOULD HAVE EVALUATED THE VALUE OF EVIDENCE OR THE EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. 5 . AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM WITHOUT CALLING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION, THE LD. D.R. HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE L ET T ER WRITTEN BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX DATED 10.5.2013 THROUGH WHICH STATEMENT OF THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF M/S J. D. INTERNATIONAL WAS CALLED FOR. IN RESPONSE THERETO , M/S J.D. INTERNATIONAL HAS FURNISHED STATEMENT, ETC. VI DE ITS LETTER DATED 24.5.2013. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVITED TO THE OTHER LETTER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX DATED 10.5.2013 WRITTEN TO M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. AND THE REPLY OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. DATED 24.5.2013 , WITH THE S UBMISSION THAT THE STATEMENT AND OTHER EVIDENCE RECEIVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WERE NOT CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND WITHOUT CALLING HIS COMMENTS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RELIED UPON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND DELETED THE ADDITION. THE LD. D.R. HAS FUR THER CONTENDED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON 6.6.20 1 3, HAVING RECEIVED THE INFORMATION VIDE LETTER DATED 24.5.2013 . THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO TIME FOR THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX TO CALL COMMENTS FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE STATEM ENT OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. AND M/S J.D. INTERNATIONAL. THE LD. D.R. HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WITHOUT CONFRONTING IT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THERE IS A VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 46A OF THE INCOME - TAX RULES AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BASED ON ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR RE - ADJUDICATION OF TH E IMPUGNED ISSUE AFTER CALLING COMMENTS AND ALSO AFTER PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 5 - : OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. D.R. HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT , THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO PROVE THREE BASIC INGREDIENTS I.E. (1) IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR; (2) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR AND (3) GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. ALL THE THREE INGREDIENTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE INDEPENDENTLY PROVED AND IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS, ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT IS CALLED FOR. IN THE INSTANT CA SE, EXCEPT BOOK ENTRIES , NOTHING IS PLACED BY THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THE LD. D.R. HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A PLEA THAT T HIS AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. AND PURCHASE TRANSACTION WAS EFFECTED THROUGH M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE LTD. AND BOTH THE ENTITIES ARE SAME, BUT THIS ASPECT WAS NOT EXAMINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER. SINCE THE ISSUE WAS NOT PROPERLY EXAMINED BY THE LD. CIT(A), THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE SET ASIDE. 6 . THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS SUBMITTED THAT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED EXPLANATIONS WITH REGARD TO THE CASH CREDIT. THE CONFIRMATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THOUGH AFTER COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT, BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD HAVE FURTHER EXAMINE D THE VERACITY OF THIS CONFIRMATION FILED BY M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED RELEVANT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CALLED REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEFORE ADMITTING THE SAME. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS PRIMARY ONUS TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE CASH CREDIT, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE ADDITION. 7 . HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FROM A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE DOCUMENTS PLACED ON RECORD, PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 6 - : WE FIND THAT UNDISPUTEDLY D URING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, A CREDIT BALANCE OF RS.2.95 CRORES IN THE NAME OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. WAS FOUND IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PLACE THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE CREDIT BALANCE APPEARING IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE NAME OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICES TO M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. BUT NO RESPONSE WAS RECEIVED AND ON ENQU IRY IT WAS ALSO NOTICED THAT SUCH COMPANY WAS NOT IN EXISTENCE AT THE ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT DISCHARGE ITS ONUS WHICH LAY ON IT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TREATED THIS CREDIT BALANCE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN T HE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE ADDITION OF THE SAME. AFTER CO MPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT, CONFIRMATION FROM M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. WAS RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THROUGH FAX, BUT IT COULD NOT BE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER AS THE ASSESS MENT WAS COMPLETED. THE SAID CONFIRMATION WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) CALLED COMMENTS/REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO CALLED ST ATEMENT OF ACCOUNT AND COPY OF INCOME - TAX RETURN FROM M/S J.D. INTERNATIONAL AND M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. VIDE LETTER DATED 10.5.2013 AND IN RESPONSE THERETO STATEMENTS WERE FILED BY M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. AND M/S J.D. INTERNATIONAL VIDE TH EIR LETTER DATED 24.5.2013. BUT THESE STATEMENTS RECEIVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WERE NOT CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , AS THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON 6.6.2013. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE US, NOTHING IS PLACED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE EVIDENCE COLLECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING WAS CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NO DOUBT , THE LD. CIT(A) IS ARMED WITH CO - TERMINUS POWER OF THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BUT PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 7 - : BESIDE S AN INV ESTIGATOR , HE IS ALSO A FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND BEFORE HIM REVENUE IS ALSO ONE OF THE PARTY. WHATEVER EVIDENCE IS COLLECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AT THE BACK OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER , SHOULD BE CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SHOULD OBTAIN HIS C OMMENTS AND THEREAFTER ISSUE CAN BE ADJUDICATED IN THE LIGHT OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE COLLECTED AND COMMENTS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT , THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO PROVE THREE BASIC INGREDIENTS I.E. (1) IDENTITY OF THE CREDI TOR; (2) CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR AND (3) GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. BY PLACING CONFIRMATION OF THE DEBIT BALANCE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE CREDITOR , ASSESSEE CAN ONLY ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS O F THE TRANSACTION , BUT FROM THIS CONFIRMATION , CRE DITWORTHINESS AND IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR CANNOT BE PROVED; WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO PROVE ALL THE THREE INGREDIENTS INDEPENDENTLY BY PLACING RELEVANT EVIDENCE. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HIMSELF HAS COLLECTED EVIDENCE I.E. STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT AND RETURN OF INCOME BUT THE SAID EVIDENCES WERE NOT CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AS IT WAS RECEIVED THROUGH LETTER DATED 24.5.2013 AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON 6.6.2013. THE ONUS IS UPON THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE COLLECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WAS DULY CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT NOTHING IS PLACED ON RECORD. 8 . WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE JUDGMENTS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASES OF ANIL RICE MILLS VS. CIT [2006] 282 ITR 236 (AL L); CIT VS. KORLAY TRADING CO. LTD. [1998] 232 ITR 820; INCOME TAX OFFICER VS. DIZA HOLDINGS (P) LTD. [2002] 255 ITR 573 AND SAJAN DASS AND SONS VS. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 435. IN ALL THESE CASES, IT HAS BEEN HELD BY VARIOUS HIGH COURTS INCLUDING THE JURISDIC TIONAL HIGH COURT THAT IN THE CASE OF CASH CREDIT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO PROVE THREE THINGS (1) IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR; (2) CAPACITY OF SUCH CREDITOR TO ADVANCE MONEY AND (3) GENUINENESS OF THE PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 8 - : TRANSACTION. IF ALL THESE ARE PROVED, THE BURDEN SHIFTS TO THE REVENUE TO PROVE THAT THE AMOUNT BELONGS TO THE ASSESSEE. 9 . IN THE INSTANT CASE , ONLY CONFIRMATION OF CREDIT BALANCE WAS FILED BUT FROM THE SAID CONFIRMATION , CREDITWORTHINESS AND IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR ARE NOT PROVED. BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, A P LEA WAS TAKEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE AMOUNT IN ORDER TO MAKE PURCHASES OF ASSETS OF M/S RAJENDRA STEELS LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION) FROM THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR. BUT THIS ASPECT WAS NOT EXAMINED BY THE LD. CIT(A). HE HAS OUT RIGHTLY ACCEPTED THE C LAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF CONFIRMATION OF THE CREDIT BALANCE OBTAINED DIRECTLY FROM THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS . ALL THESE INSTANCES SUGGEST THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS HURRIEDLY ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOU T MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION OF THE RECEIPT OF AMOUNT OF RS.2.95 CRORES FROM M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. IT WAS STATED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT OUT OF RS.2.95 CRORES RS.1 CRORE WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S J.D . INTERNATIONAL AND IT WAS WRONGLY EN TERED IN THE NAME OF M/S ROOP SHAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. , WHICH WAS LATER ON REVERSED BY MAKING NECESSARY ENTRY IN THE NEXT FINANCIAL YEAR. BUT THIS ASPECT WAS ALSO NOT EXAMINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER. 10 . KEEPING IN VIEW THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT PROPERLY EXAMINED THE ISSUE IN DETAIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND HAS ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE SIMPLY ON THE BASIS OF CONFIRMATION OF THE DEBIT BALANCE IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE CR EDITOR. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO RE - ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE ASPECTS RAISED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IF NEED BE, THE LD. CIT(A) MAY EXAMINE THE CREDITOR HIMSELF OR THROUGH THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND OTHER ASPECTS. NEEDLESS TO MENTION HERE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) S H OULD AFFORD PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 9 - : OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE WHILE ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE AND WOULD DECIDE THE APPEAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, AS THE MATTER RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. 11 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12.5.2014. S D/ - S D/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 12 TH MAY , 2014 JJ: 0705 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )