ACIT CC-25, New Delhi V. Pawansut Holdings Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 8517/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves three appeals by the Revenue against Pawansut Holdings Ltd. concerning the deletion of protective additions made on various grounds including obtaining accommodation entries and commission earned from these entries for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. The main contention was whether the additions made by the Revenue were justified. The assessee, represented by Mr. Vivek Agarwal, argued that the transactions were under the control of Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jindal, who had already included the income from these transactions in his tax returns. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, after considering the submissions and the letter from Mr. Jindal, decided to dismiss the Revenue's appeals.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 112735 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 07-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 30-08-2012
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No. 8288/Del/2018 (A.Y 2012-13), ITA No. 8289/Del/2018 (A.Y 2013-14), ITA No. 8290/Del/2019 (A.Y 2014-15)
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Accommodation entries

Judgement Text

1 ITA Nos. 8427, 8517 & 9834/Del/2019 ACIT VS. PAWANSUT HOLDINGS IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH : “F” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 8427/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2012-13) ACIT Central Circle-25 Room No. 322, E-2, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi (APPELLANT) Vs. Pawansut Holdings Ltd. 415, Usha Kiran Building Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi PAN No. AAACP6964H (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 8517/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2013-14) ACIT Central Circle-25 Room No. 322, E-2, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi (APPELLANT) Vs. Pawansut Holdings Ltd. 415, Usha Kiran Building Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi PAN No. AAACP6964H (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 9834/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2014-15) ACIT Central Circle-25 Room No. 322, E-2, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi (APPELLANT) Vs. Pawansut Holdings Ltd. 415, Usha Kiran Building Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi PAN No. AAACP6964H (RESPONDENT) 2 ITA Nos. 8427, 8517 & 9834/Del/2019 ACIT VS. PAWANSUT HOLDINGS ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM These three appeals are filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -29, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals) dated 26/08/2019 for assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- I.T.A. No. 8517/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2012-13) “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs. 49,00,000/- made on obtaining accommodation entries. 2. On the facts and in the circumstance of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs. 2,80,00,000/- made on obtaining accommodation entries. 3. On the facts and in the circumstance of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs. 4,93,02,817/- made on commission earned for providing accommodation entries. Assessee by Sh. Vivek Agarwal, Adv. Department by Shri H. K. Mishra, Sr. D. R.; Date of Hearing 08.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement 14.12.2022 3 ITA Nos. 8427, 8517 & 9834/Del/2019 ACIT VS. PAWANSUT HOLDINGS I.T.A. No. 8517/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2013-14) “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting protective addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made on account of obtaining accommodation entries. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs. 4,93,02,817/- made on account of commission earned for providing accommodation entries.” I.T.A. No. 8517/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2014-15) 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting protective addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made on account of obtaining accommodation entries. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs. 20,24,71,777/- made on providing accommodation entries of exempt LTCG. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs. 4,93,02,817/- made on account of commission earned for providing accommodation entries.” 3. In all the above three appeals, the Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A) deleting the protective addition on account of unexplained investment in shares, also aggrieved by the deletion of protective addition made on account of providing accommodation entries of exempt LTCG and also aggrieved by the deletion of protective addition made on account of commission earned for providing accommodation entries. 4 ITA Nos. 8427, 8517 & 9834/Del/2019 ACIT VS. PAWANSUT HOLDINGS 4. The AR Shri. Vivek Agarwal appeared for the assessee and submitted that the entire transaction of the assessee i.e. Pawansut Holding Ltd. has been controlled by Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jindal having PAN No. AAIPJ8526A and Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jindal has accepted that commission earned on accommodation entries given by the assessee as a part of taxable income of Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jindal in respect of the year under consideration. Further, the Ld. AR has produced the letter written by Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jindal which is reproduced hereunder:- 5 ITA Nos. 8427, 8517 & 9834/Del/2019 ACIT VS. PAWANSUT HOLDINGS 5. By considering the statement made by the Ld. A.R and also the letter of Sh. Pradeep Kumar Jindal filed by the Ld. A.R, wherein Shri. Pradeep Kumar Jindal has accepted that the commission earned on accommodation entries given by the assessee as a part of his income in respect of the year under consideration and the issue will be adjudicated in the appeals filed by Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal (in ITA No. 8288/Del/2018 (A.Y 2012-13), ITA No. 8289/Del/2018 (A.Y 2013-14) & ITA No. 8290/Del/2019 (A.Y 2014-15), we inclined to dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. However, in the event of any deletion in the hands of Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal, wherein the substantial addition were made, the Revenue shall have liberty to take further steps against the assessee herein in accordance with law. 6. Further we direct the registry to place the written submission made by the Ld. AR dated 08/12/2012 along with the letter written by Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal dated 07/12/2022 and the copy of this order in the file of ITA 6 ITA Nos. 8427, 8517 & 9834/Del/2019 ACIT VS. PAWANSUT HOLDINGS No. 8288/Del/2018 (A.Y 2012-13), ITA No. 8289/Del/2018 (A.Y 2013-14) & ITA No. 8290/Del/2019 (A.Y 2014-15) filed by Sh. Pradeep Kumar Jindal. 7. In the result, Appeal in ITA No. 8427/Del/2019, 8517/Del/2019 and 9834/Del/2019 are dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on : 14.12.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. B. R. R. KUMAR) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 14/12/2022 *R. N, SR. PS* Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT(A) (Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI