ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Varun Beverages Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 832/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1573 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B P SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJAT JAIN C AS
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Search and seizure; Source of fund; Corroborative evidences; Onus to prove
• Section: 69C; 153A; 14A; 133(6); 143(1); 131; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008-09 TO 2010-11 ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, NEW DELHI. VS. VARUN BEVERAGES LTD., R/O F.2/7, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-I, NEW DELHI. PAN: AAACV2678L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AKSHAT JAIN & SHRI RAJAT JAIN, CAS REVENUE BY : SHRI B.P. SINGH, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 17.10.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.11.2018 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: THE ABOVE THREE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 14.11.2014 OF THE CIT(A)-31, DELHI RELATING T O ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11, RESPECTIVELY. SINCE IDENTICAL G ROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THEREFORE, THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 2 2. FIRST, WE WILL TAKE UP ITA NO.832/DEL/2015 AS TH E LEAD CASE. THE FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERA TION U/S 132 OF THE IT ACT WAS CARRIED OUT ON M/S JAIPURIA GROUP OF CASES ON 27 TH MARCH, 2012. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO COVERED IN THE SAID SEARCH. IN RESPONSE TO NO TICE U/S 153A OF THE IT ACT, 1961 DATED 8 TH APRIL, 2013, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCO ME ON 1 ST JULY, 2013 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS.22,00,93,190/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT DURING THE SEARCH O PERATIONS, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE GROUP HAS BOOKED SUBSTANTIAL EXPENSES UNDE R THE HEAD ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES. SOME OF THE EXPENSES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE GENUINE/JUSTIFIED. THE A.O. NOTED THAT IN THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE POST SEARCH IN VESTIGATION, VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 16 TH JULY, 2012, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS OF THE ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES. FROM THE VARIOUS DETAILS FURNISHED BY TH E ASSESSEE, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THERE ARE NUMBER OF PARTIES TO WHOM ADVERTISEMENT E XPENSES HAVE BEEN BOOKED, BUT, NO ADDRESS OR PAN HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. HE, THEREFOR E, ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES BOOKED FROM SUCH PARTIES MAY NOT BE TREATED AS BOGUS DUE TO THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE I DENTITY OF THE PARTIES. REJECTING VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASS ESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS.2,03,82,486/- TREATING THE ABOVE ADVERTISEMENT E XPENSES AS NOT GENUINE AND, THEREFORE, HE TREATED THE SUM AS UNEXPLAINED EXPEND ITURE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69C OF THE IT ACT. SIMILAR ADDITION HAS BE EN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,12,16,675/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 009-10 AND RS.2,41,17,429/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69C OF THE IT ACT. ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 3 3. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED TH E VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND. HOWEVER, THE LD.CIT(A) HELD THAT WHEN A SEARCH U/S 132 HAS B EEN INITIATED IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, ASSESSMENTS OF SIX YEARS PRIOR TO THE SEA RCH YEAR CAN BE REOPENED AUTOMATICALLY AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS A DUTY TO ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THOSE RELEVANT YEA RS. THEREFORE, THE REQUIREMENT OF INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS BEING IN POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR REASSESSING THE INCOME IS NOT NECESSARY. SO FAR AS THE MERIT O F THE CASE IS CONCERNED, HE DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4.2.12 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR AND PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE AO HAS MISREAD THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69C OF THE ACT . THE SAID SECTION IS APPLICABLE IN CASES WHERE ANY EXPENDITURE IS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED AND APPELLANT IS NOT AB LE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF FUNDS USED IN SUCH EXPENDITURE. IN THE PRESENT C ASE IT IS NOBODYS CASE THAT THE APPELLANT DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT SOURCE T O EXPLAIN THE ADVERTISEMENT EXPENDITURE. THE FACT THAT THE ADVERT ISEMENT EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN DULY ENTERED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND PAYM ENTS HAVE BEEN MADE FROM THE APPELLANTS BANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED IN TH E REGULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS AND ALSO THAT THE EXPENDITURE FINDS ITS DU E PLACE IN THE P & L A/C SHOWS THAT THIS IS NOT THE CASE WHICH COULD BE COVE RED U/S 69C OF THE ACT. TO THIS EXTENT THE AOS ACTION CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. 4.2 IT IS NOTED THAT THE AO HAS APPROACHED THE ISSUE O F GENUINENESS OF EXPENDITURE IN A COMPLETELY INCORRECT WAY. AT PARA 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, HE NOTES THAT IN THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BY TH E ASSESSEE NO ADDRESS OR PAN WERE AVAILABLE IN SOME OF THE CASES AND THAT A SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 29.06.2012 TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES, ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES BOOKED FROM SUCH PARTIES MAY NOT BE TREATED AS BOGU S. IN THE CASE OF AN EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY A BUSINESS ENTITY, THE AO I S REQUIRED TO FIRST EXAMINE WHETHER THE ASSESSEE POSSESSES SUFFICIENT A ND NECESSARY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. SUCH EVIDENCES COULD BE IN T HE FORM OF BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND EVIDENCES OF ACTUAL RECEIPT OF GOODS O R SERVICES. HOWEVER, THE AO HAS STRAIGHTWAY CONCLUDED THAT THE IDENTITY OF T HE PARTIES IN WHOSE ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 4 NAME ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES HAVE BEEN BOOKED WAS NO T ESTABLISHED BY THE APPELLANT. 4.2.14 I DO NOT CONSIDER THAT IN CASE OF AN EXPENDITURE BOOKED BY THE ASSESSEE, THERE IS ANY INITIAL ONUS ON HIM TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES BY PROVIDING THE PAN DETAILS ETC. WHAT IS REQUIRED IS THE AVAILABILITY OF BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND THESE WOULD THEMSELVES CONTA IN ALL THE NAME AND ADDRESSES OF THE PARTY WHO HAD SUPPLIED GOODS OR SE RVICES. IN THE PRESENT CASE THERE IS NO FINDING THAT THE AO HAS BOTHERED T O LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTS SUCH AS BILLS AND VOUCHERS IN RESPECT OF ADVERTISEM ENT EXPENSES MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS IS A SEARCH AND SEIZURE CASE AND IT IS EXPECTED THAT AUTHORITIES WOULD BE HAVING ACCESS TO THE DOCUMENTS AND BOOKS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AO IS REQUIRED TO ASCERTAIN IF THERE IS ANY DEFICIENCY IN THE MAINTENANCE OF IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS LIKE BILLS A ND VOUCHERS IN RESPECT OF THE EXPENSES CLAIMED IN THE P & L A/C. 4.2.15 HOWEVER, THE AO SEEMS TO HAVE CALLED FOR DETAILS A ND ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF C ERTAIN DEFICIENCIES, OF NOT PROVIDING ADDRESS & PAN, HE HAS COME TO THE CON CLUSION THAT THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES HAS NOT BEEN PROVED, AS IF THAT IS REQUIREMENT IN THE CASE OF EXPENSES DEBITED TO P & L A/C. NO DOUBT, TH E IDENTITY OF THE PARTY IS CERTAINLY AN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. BUT THE SAME PR IMA FACIE WOULD BE AVAILABLE ON ALL THE BILLS AND VOUCHERS RELATING TO THE EXPENDITURE BOOKED BY THE ASSESSEE. I DO NOT CONSIDER THAT THE AO CAN ISSUE A SHOW- CAUSE NOTICE FOR DISALLOWING THE ADVERTISEMENT EXPENDITUR E BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES, AS IF THIS IS A CASE OF LOAN OR CASH CREDITS. 4.2.16. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ALSO THE AO HAS ASKED THE APPELLANT TO PROVE THE IDENTITY , GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF PARTIES ALONG WITH THEIR RECONCILIATION IN THE BOOKS OF ACC OUNTS. THIS IS MENTIONED AT 3 RD PARA OF POINT NO. 4 ON PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT OR DER. THE RELEVANT PARA OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS REPRODUCED BELOW FO R READY REFERENCE:- DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ONCE AGAIN THE A SSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF THE ADVERTISEMENT E XPENSES MADE PARTY WISE ALONGWITH THEIR NAMES, ADDRESSES & PAN, DETAILS NATURE OF THE ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES, AND WHETHER T DS HAS BEEN MADE ON SUCH EXPENSES AS PER THE QUESTIONNAIRE DATE D 23.10.2013. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO REQUESTED TO PROV E THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF PARTI ES ALONG WITH THEIR RECONCILIATION IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN S PITE OF HEARING ON VARIOUS DATES, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH TH E SAID DETAILS. ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 5 THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUESTED TO FURNISH THE SAID DETA ILS VIDE SUMMON U/S 131 DATED 10.02.2014. THE STATEMENT OF T HE ASSESSEE WAS RECORDED ON 05.03.2014, BUT THE ASSESSEE REQUES TED FOR FURTHER TIME TO FURNISH THE SAME SHORTLY. 4.2.17. I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE VERY APPROACH OF ASKING T HE APPELLANT TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINES S OF THE PARTIES TO WHOM ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES HAVE BEEN PAID IS INCORRECT IN THE GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES. THE AO HAS NOT AT ALL EXAMINED THE D OCUMENTS WHICH ARE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE ABOUT THE EXPENSES INCU RRED BY HIM. INSTEAD, AS IF IT IS A CASE OF CASH CREDITS OR LOANS, THE AO HA S REQUIRED THE APPELLANT TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINES S OF THE PARTIES. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT UNDER THE LAW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INITIAL ONUS TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE P ARTIES FROM WHOM HE HAS RECEIVED GOODS AND SERVICES. THEREFORE, THIS APPROA CH OF THE AO CANNOT BE SUPPORTED. 4.2.18 AS REGARDS THE NON-COMPLIANCE TO NOTICE U/S 133(6) BY THE THIRD PARTIES, IT IS NOTED THAT THE AO HAS COME TO CONCLU SION THAT THE TRANSACTION INVOLVED WITH THE SAID THIRD PARTY COULD BE BOGUS, MERELY BECAUSE THE PARTY HAS CHOSEN NOT TO ANSWER THE AOS QUESTION. IN THE CASE OF EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DULY REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD MAINTAIN PR OPER BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND EVIDENCES FOR HAVING PURCHASED THE GOODS OR FOR HAVING INCURRED EXPENSES. THE INITIAL ONUS CAST UPON HIM WOULD STAN D DISCHARGED ONCE HE IS ABLE TO SHOW THE ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS A ND PROVIDE SUPPORTING EVIDENCES AS SUCH AS BILLS AND VOUCHERS. IN THE PRE SENT CASE, IT IS NOT THE CASE OF AO THAT THE APPELLANT DID NOT HAVE NECESSAR Y ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS REGULARLY MAINTAINED BY IT. IT IS ALSO NOT THE AOS CASE THAT THE NECESSARY BILLS AND VOUCHERS WERE NOT FOUND WITH TH E ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT ON PRODUCTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOU NTS AND NECESSARY BILLS AND VOUCHERS IN SUPPORT OF THE EXPENSES DEBITED TO P & L A/C THE INITIAL ONUS CAST UPON THE ASSESSEE STOOD DISCHARGED. IF TH E AO HAD ANY MISGIVINGS ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THESE EXPENSES HE WAS WITH IN HIS RIGHTS TO CONDUCT INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION ON THE MATTER. HOWEVER, M ERELY BECAUSE HE HAS FAILED IN HIS ATTEMPT TO CONTACT THE THIRD PARTY WI TH WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD TRANSACTION (OR OBTAIN REPLIES FROM HIM), HE CANNOT COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE TRANSACTION ITSELF WAS BOGUS. 4.1.19 IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOT THE AOS CASE THAT T HE NOTICES ISSUED U/S 133(6) HAVE BEEN RECEIVED UNSERVED. THIS SHOWS THAT THE PARTY WAS VERY MUCH THERE AT THE ADDRESSES GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE SAID PARTY HAS NOT REPLIED TO THE AOS QUERY. THE RESPONSE OF THE AO SHOULD HAVE ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 6 BEEN TO ENFORCE COMPLIANCE TO HIS NOTICE U/S 133(6) . HOWEVER, IT WOULD BE COMPLETELY INCORRECT TO FORM A PRESUMPTION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE OF THE INACTION OF THE THIRD PARTY. 4.2.20 IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE AO HAS MADE ADDITIO N SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF NON- COMPLIANCE TO NOTICES U/S 133(6) BY THE THIRD PARTIES. THIS ACTION OF THE AO CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. 4.2.21. THERE IS MERIT IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE AR A ND ALSO HIS RELIANCE ON THE CASE LAWS CITED BY HIM AS DETAILED AT PARA 4.2. 8. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,03,82,486/- MADE U/S 69C OF THE ACT IS HER EBY DELETED. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE REV ENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW A ND FACTS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD . CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,03,82,486/- M ADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED ADVERTISEMENT EXP ENSES. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND ANY/ALL G ROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEA L. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, FILED THE FOLLOWING LEGAL GROUND UNDER RULE 27 OF THE IT(AT) RULES, 1963:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE, AD DITIONS MADE UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS BAD IN LAW AS THE SAME WERE NOT MADE ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOU ND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION AND THE CASE OF RELEVA NT ASSESSMENT YEAR HAS ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) /143(3) WHICH COULD NOT ABATE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH 5.1 IDENTICAL GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED FOR THE OTHE R YEARS ALSO. ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 7 6. REFERRING TO THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CA SE OF ACIT VS. DEVYANI INTERNATIONAL LTD. AND VICE VERSA , HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL, UNDER IDENTICAL F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, HAS ADMITTED THE GROUND RAISED U NDER RULE 27 OF THE IT(AT) RULES, 1963 AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERI AL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH HAS QUASHED THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A OF THE IT ACT. HE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE IN THE INSTANT CASES ALSO NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WA S FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE ON THE BASIS OF ENTRIES ALREADY ENTERED INTO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HON' BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA REPORTED IN 61 TAXMANN.COM 412 , THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A HAS TO BE QUASHED. 7. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BO TH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. A BARE PERUSAL O F THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL F OUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WITH RESPECT TO THE UNEXPLAINED ADVERTISEMENT EXPEN SES. THERE IS ALSO NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL ON WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE TH E OTHER ADDITION I.E., ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, IT IS QUITE CLEAR THAT THE ADDITION IN THE INSTANT CASE HAS BEEN MADE ON THE BASIS OF POST SEA RCH INQUIRY AND THE ADDITION IS NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING TH E COURSE OF SEARCH. THEREFORE, THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CAS E OF CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA (SUPRA) WILL BE CLEARLY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRES ENT CASE WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS CAN BE INTERFERED WITH BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE MAKING ITA NOS.832, 863 & 864/DEL/2015 8 ASSESSMENTS U/S 153A ONLY ON THE BASIS OF SOME INCR IMINATING MATERIAL UNEARTHED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH WAS NOT PRODUCED OR NOT DISCLOSED OR NOT MADE KNOWN IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENTS. SINCE THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR IS A COMPLETED ASSESSMENT, THEREFORE, THE SAME, IN OUR O PINION, CANNOT BE DISTURBED WITHOUT ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. SIMILAR ARE THE CASES FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 AND 2010-11. SINCE THE RE VENUE FAILED TO BRING ON RECORD ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, THEREFORE, THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS IN THE INSTANT CASE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN DISTURBED. WE, THEREFORE, ALLOW THE LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER RULE 27 OF THE IT(AT) RULES, 1963 AND DECIDE THE SAME IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE T HE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDS ON THE LEGAL GROUND, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE ABOVE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 0.11.2018. SD/- SD/- (KULDIP SINGH) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMFBER DATED: 20 TH NOVEMBER, 2018 DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI