ITO, New Delhi V. M/s. Lock Ranjan Exports Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 914/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4980 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 22-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRAVAN GOTRU
• Keywords: Accommodation entries
• Section: 131; 68; 148

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 914/DEL/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002 - 03 ) ITO, WARD - 4(4), ROOM NO. 234 - B, CR BUILDING, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI VS. LOCK RANJAN EXPORTS PVT. LTD, 415, SAINIK VIHAR, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI SHRAVAN GOTRU, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY: SHRI VED JAIN, ADV DATE OF HEARING 24/08 / 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28 / 08 / 2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT ( A), - VII, NEW DELHI DATED 26.12.2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002 - 03. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. THE ORDER OF T HE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS & CONTRARY TO FACTS & LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF RS.23,75,000/ - IGNORING : A. THAT BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF CHEQUES FROM THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE SHARE APPLICANTS THERE WERE MANY ENTRIES OF CASH DEPOSITS & IT IS SEEN THAT MONEY WAS WITHDRAWN ON THE SAME DATE OR THE VERY NEXT DATE WHICH SHOWS THAT THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICANTS ARE ENTRY OPERATORS. B. THAT THE FAILED TO FU RNISH EVEN BANK STATEMENTS FOR MOST OF THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICANTS. C. THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICANTS FOR VERIFICATION. MERE SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS & MATERIALS IS HELD TO BE INSUFFICIENT IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN TEA TRAD ING CO VS. CIT 263 ITR 289. D. THE FINDINGS & INVESTIGATIONS MADE BY THE INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTMENT. E. THE DICTUM GIVEN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT VS DURGA PRASAD MORE 82 ITR 540 & SUMATI DAYAL VS CIT 214 ITR PAGE 2 OF 8 801 IN WHICH APEX COURT HAS LAID DOWN THE PROPOSITION THAT THE COURTS & TRIBUNALS SHOULD SEE THE PREPONDERANCE OF PROBABILITIES WHILE CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. F. THAT IN RESPECT OF THIS CASE, THE RATIO OF CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ARE NOT APPLICABLE AT ALL. THE CIT(A) BASED HIS DECISION ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT IN DIVINE LEASING & FINANCE LTD & LOVELY EXPORTS IGNORING THAT THE FACTS ARE ESSENTIALLY DIFFERENT IN AS MUCH AS IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIVATE COMPANY A ND NO MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATED. ON THE OTHER HAND IN THE CASE OF DIVINE LEASING & FINANCE LTD & LOVELY EXPORTS, THE SHARE APPLICATIONS WERE MADE BY WAY OF PUBLIC ISSUES. G. THAT THE AO IS DUTY BOUND U/S 68 TO ENQUIRE INTO THE CREDITWORTHINESS, IDE NTITY OF THE CREDITORS & GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN IGNORING SUCH FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING ADDITI ON OF RS.25,000/ - IGNORING THAT NO SALE/PURCHASE BILLS A/W BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS PRODUCED DESPITE SPECIFIC REQUEST IN THIS REGARD VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE DT 16 - 11 - 2007. THE SAID BILLS WERE ALSO NOT PRODUCED DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(A). 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING DISALLOWANCE OF PRELIMINARY EXPENSES OF RS.22,188/ - & PREOPERATIVE EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.30,000/ - WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE SAID PRELIMINARY EXPENSES & PR E - OPERATIVE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. FURTHER, THE DEBIT ENTRIES IN R/O SAID EXPENSES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT DO NOT PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE SAID EXPENSES AS NEITHER THE RECIPIENT PARTY NOR THE END USE IS V ERIFIABLE FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING ADDITION MADE OF RS. 10,00,000/ - AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN IRONING : - A) THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH THE DETAILS I.E. LOCATION, ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY PURCHASES & SOLD BY IT. B) THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH THE COPIES OF PURCHASE DOCUMENTS & SALE DOCUMENTS. C) THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH THE DATES OF REGISTRATION OF PROPERTY. D) THAT VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTR Y DATED 14 - 12 - 2007, THE ASSESSEE EXPRESSED ITS INABILITY TO FURNISH ANY DETAILS/DOCUMENTS REGARDING THE TRANSACTIONS. E) THAT IT WAS NOT INTIMATED BY THE ASSESSEE WHETHER THE PURCHASE/SALE OF THE PROPERTY WAS GOT REGISTERED THROUGH REGISTRAR OF PROPERTIES. F) THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH DETAILS REGARDING WHETHER THE PROPERTY WAS SITUATED IN DELHI OR OUTSIDE DELHI. G) THAT THE ONUS OF PROVING THAT PROFIT OF ONLY RS.2,14,996/ - WAS EARNED ON THE IMPUGNED TRANSACTIONS IS ON ASSESSEE. PAGE 3 OF 8 3. FACTS STATED IN BRIEF OF THE CASES THAT ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF GROWTH AND SALE OF PROPERTIES, WHO FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 21/10/2000 TO SHOWING INCOME OF RS. 287826/ . THE RETURN WAS NOT PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY BUT WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143 (1) ON 28 /2/2003. SUBSEQUENTLY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 23/03/2007. BASED ON INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING REGARDING PURCHASE OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES BY THE ASSESSEE FROM CERTAIN EN TRY OPERATORS THROUGH CHEQUES IN LIEU OF CASH PAYMENTS. ACCORDING TO THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE YEAR ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED RS. 23.75 LACS AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND HE ASKED ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAIL OF SHAREHOLDERS. ASSESSEE FURNISHED T HE A. COPIES OF CHEQUES ISSUED BY THEM TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, B. AFFIDAVIT CONFIRMING THE INVESTMENT THE SHAREHOLDERS C. COPY OF THEIR INCOME TAX RETURN D. BALANCE SHEET OF THE INVESTORS WHERE THE INVESTMENT IS SHOWN BY THEM E. COPY OF THEIR PAN/RATION CARD F. IN CASE OF COMPANY INVESTORS COPIES OF THEIR BANKS STATEMENT, BOWDEN RESOLUTIONS AND G. AFFIDAVIT OF THE DIRECTOR OF INVESTOR COMPANY H. COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF SHAREHOLDERS SHOWING CHEQUES ISSUED TO THE COMPANY T HEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, IT HAS ESTABLISH ED IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS, AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. HOWEVER, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT BELIEVE THE ABOUT TRANSACTION FOR THE REASON THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH THE BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF ANY OF THE PERSONS FROM WHOM SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS RECEIVED. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED FOR MAKE STATEMENT OF THE INVESTOR BY ISSUING LETTERS UNDER SECTION 133 (6) OF THE ACT. IN SOME OF THE CASES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO STATED THAT IMMEDIATELY BEFORE ISSUING PAY ORDERS TO TH E ASSESSEE THESE PERSONS HAS DEPOSITED CASH ON THE PREVIOUS DAY OR THE SAME DAY IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT. IT WAS ALSO THE CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE EVEN 1 OF THE 11 PARTIES OR BANK ACCOUNT OF EVEN ONE OF THE 34 PARTIES. THE REFORE, HE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 23.75 LACS. ASSESSEE CARRIED MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT A, WHO DELETED THE ADDITION OBSERVING THAT IN THE OVERWHELMING DETAILS PAGE 4 OF 8 SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS, AND GENUINENESS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PROVED. 4. REVENUE HAS CONTESTED THIS ADDITION BY GROUND NO. 2 OF THE APPEAL. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF CIT A AS WELL AS ON THE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS WITH RESPECT TO EACH OF THE CREDITOR MADE BY HIM BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BEFORE LD. CIT A. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN ALL CASES THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF BANK STATEMENT. HE FURTHER SU BMITTED THAT ALL THE PERSONS WHO HAVE DEPOSITED MONEY AS SHARE CAPITAL OF THE COMPANY ARE ENGAGED IN THEIR SEPARATE BUSINESSES AND HAVE SUBMITTED THEIR BALANCE SHEETS AND RETURN OF INCOME. DESPITE FURNISHING ALL THESE INFORMATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER, HE HAS NOT CARRIED OUT ANY INVESTIGATION TO SHOW THAT THESE PERSONS ARE ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PROVIDERS. HE FURTHER REFERRED TO THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN IT WAS NOT MENTIONED THAT FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED ACCOMM ODATION ENTRIES, WHO IS THE ENTRY OPERATORS. WHAT IS THE TRANSACTION OF THOSE PARTIES WITH THE ASSESSEE, FROM WHICH BANK ACCOUNT. THESE ENTRIES ARE BEEN TAKEN. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE ARE ONLY SOME IS MENTIONED OF RS. 10 41 560/ WITHOUT ANY NAME W ITHOUT ANY BANK ACCOUNT OR WITHOUT THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, HE SUBMITTED THAT ALLEGATION OF OBTAINING THE ENTRIES FROM THE ENTRY OPERATOR IS TOTALLY UNFOUNDED. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE LIGHT OF DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ISSUE OF 23.75 LACS AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY THE ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. HE FURTHER REFERRED TO PAGE NO. 13 354 OF THE PAPER BOOK TO SHOW THAT EXHAUSTIVE DETAILS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO THE AMOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE DOCUMENT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN PAPER BOOK BEFORE LOWER AUTHORITIES. UN DOUBTEDLY, DURING THE YEAR, ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED A SUM OF RS. 23.75 LACS AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND FOR WHICH IT REQUIRES TO SUBSTANTIATE THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DEPOSITORS ALSO THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSE E IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF GROWTH AS WELL AS HAS DERIVED INCOME FROM SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY AS SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN. DURING PAGE 5 OF 8 THE YEAR, COMPANY HAS ISSUED SHARES OF RS. 10 EACH TO 34 PERSONS AMOUNTING TO RS. 23.75 LACS. THE ASSESSEE HA S SUBMITTED A CHART WHEREIN IT IS GIVEN THE NAME OF THE INVESTORS, THEN ADDRESS, NUMBER OF SHARES ALLOTTED TO SUCH PARTIES, THE MODE OF RECEIPT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY IN THE FORM OF CHECK OR CASH, DATE ON WHICH IT IS RECEIVED AND TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE RE CEIPT. THIS CHART WAS FURTHER SUBSTANTIATED BY SUBMITTING THE DETAILS OF EACH OF THE SHAREHOLDERS GIVING THEIR CONFIRMATION, THEIR RETURN OF INCOME, THERE BALANCE SHEET WHEREIN THE INVESTMENT IS SHOWN, AND PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER ISSUED TO THEM ALONG WITH RATION CARD, ETC. ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF THE CHEQUES ISSUED BY THEM TO THE COMPANY AS WELL AS THE COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT WHEREVER THE SUM IS RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE. OUT OF THE INVESTORS 14 COMPANIES AND OTHERS ARE INDIVIDUALS. IN CASE OF THE INVESTMENT BY THE COMPANY, THE DETAILS OF INVESTMENT ARE SHOWN BY THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY THAT COMPANY AS WELL AS THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY. IN CASE OF ONE OF THE COMPANY WHO HAS INVESTED A SUM OF RS. 2 LACS IN THE COMPANY I S ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF FABRICATION AND ITS BALANCE SHEET SIZES, ALMOST OF RS. 80 LACS. IT IS ALSO CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF FABRICATION WHERE ITS TURNOVER IS 2.31 CRORES RESULTING INTO PROFIT OF RS. 6.36 LACS. THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY DID NOT SHOW THAT ON THE EARLIER DAY OR PRIOR TO THAT, THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. IN CASE OF ANOTHER COMPANY WHO HAS INVESTED FURTHER RS. 2 LACS IN THE COMPANY IS ALSO ENGAGED IN TRADING BUSINESS HAVING THE SIZE OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF 25 LACS AND HAS INVESTMENT OF 16.86 LACS AS THE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF EQUIPMENT TRADING EVEN IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THAT COMPANY, BEFORE ISSUING CHEQUE THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSITED OR CASH WAS NOT EVEN DEPOSITED EARLIER TO THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THE CHEQUE. SAME IS THE CASE WITH IG PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, WHO DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS. 1 LAKH ON 04/02/2000 BUT THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THAT COMPANY BEFORE ISSUE OF CHEQUES TO THE COMPANY. SIMILARLY IS THE CASE OF INDIVIDUAL WHERE IN CASE OF MR SANJAY JAIN, WHO HAS DEPOSITED RS. 1 LAKH ON 23/2/2000 THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CHECK. LOOKING AT HIS BALANCE SHEET HIS INVESTMENT IS RS. 5.68 LAKHS AND OTHER ADVANCES, FIXED DEPOSITS, AND DEBTORS ETC AS PER HIS BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31 / 3 / 1999 WAS RS. 12 LACS. SIMILARLY LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS TOOK US WITH RESPECT TO THE PAGE 6 OF 8 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY EACH OF THE INVESTOR SHAREHOLDERS AND HE SUBMITTED THAT IN NONE OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE DEPOSIT ORS THE ALLEGATION OF THE AO THAT THE AMOUNT IS DEPOSITED IN CASH PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CHECK TO THE ASSESSEE IS CORRECT. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO COULD NOT SHOW US ANY BANK ACCOUNT OF THE DEPOSITORS WHERE SUCH AMOUNT HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN CASH PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF CHECK AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHERMORE , WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE LD. AO BASED ON WHICH HE HAS MADE THE ADDITION. ON THE BASIS OF REASONS RECORDED IT SHOWS THAT A SUM OF RS. 10.41 LACS HA S BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. WE ARE SURPRISED TO NOTE THAT ON 18/08/2001 THE SUM OF RS. 300450/ IS STATED TO BE CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, ON LOOKING AT THE STATEMENT OF THE LD. AO IT IS APPARENT THAT ON THAT PARTICULAR DATE ONLY SOME OF RS. 1 LAKH FROM ONE PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY IS DEPOSITED. FURTHER MORE IN THE REASONS RECORDED, IT IS NOT CLEAR THAT WHO WAS THE PERSON WHO WAS PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO THE ASSESSEE AND WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE THAT ASSES SEE HAS PURCHASED THESE CHEQUES IN LIEU OF THE CASH PAYMENTS. NO REFERENCE OF ANY STATEMENT RECORDED BY THE REVENUE AS WELL AS WHO SE STATEMENT IT IS RECORDED IS ALSO NOT CLEAR. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO FURTHER NOT CARRIED OUT ANY ENQUIRY WITH RESPECT TO THE DOCUMENT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BY ISSUING THEM SUMMONS UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE ACT. FURTHER THE BANK STATEMENTS OBTAINED BY THE AO FROM THE BANKS OF THE DEPOSIT OR, HE HAS NOT MENTIONED ANY INSTANCES WHEREIN, WHICH BANK ACCOUNT THE MONEY IS DEPOSITED IN CASH. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN OVERWHELMING EVIDENCES PROVING THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. AO INCORRECT ABOUT DEPOSIT OF THE CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE INVESTORS PRIOR TO ISSUE OF THE CHEQUE, THE SUBSTANCE IN THE ACTIVITIES OF THOSE ASSESSEES SHOWN IN THEIR BALANCE SHEET AND AS THEY ARE ASSESSED TO INCOME TAX, NO FACTS HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE LD. AO THAT ALL THESE 34 PARTIES ARE ENTRY OP ERATORS, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY OTHER OPTION BUT TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT A OF DELETING THE ABOVE ADDITION OF RS. 23.75 LACS RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. IN THE RESULT GROUND NO. 2 OF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6. NO A RGUMENTS WERE ADVANCED WITH RESPECT TO GROUND NO. 3 AND GROUND NO. 4 OF THE APPEAL BY REVENUE AND WE ALSO DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT A, IN DELETING THE ABOUT DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF PAGE 7 OF 8 PRELIMINARY EXPENSES AND PREOPERATIVE EXPE NSES WRITTEN OFF. HENCE, GROUND NO. 3 AND 4 OF THE APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 7. GROUND NO. 5 OF THE APPEAL IS WITH RESPECT TO THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS MADE BY THE LD. AO IN THE SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN COMPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS PURC HASED AND SOLD WELL BECAUSE OF LAND. DURING THE YEAR AND HAS RESULTED INTO THE PROFIT OF RS. 2 14996. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LAND WAS PURCHASED FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 35 LACS ON WHICH A SUM OF RS. 2.85 LACS WAS INCURRED AS A STAMP DUTY AND SALE CONSIDERATION WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S SUBASH EXHIBITORS PRIVATE LIMITED OF RS. 40 LACS RESULTING INTO THE ABOVE CAPITAL GAIN. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THIS AMOUNT AS SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN, BUT LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS F OR THE REASON THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF THE PROPERTY AND DOCUMENTS OF PURCHASE AND THE SALES OF THE SAID PROPERTY. THE ABOVE ADDITION WAS ALSO MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IS THE SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN ONLY. CIT APPEAL DELETED TH E ABOVE ADDITION. 8. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT AS ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE DETAILS OF THE PURCHASES AND SALES BY SUBMITTING THE DOCUMENTS THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AD HOC ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS, WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE SUSTAINED. LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CAPITAL GAINS ON SALE OF PROPERTIES AS SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND ALSO GIVEN THE NAME OF THE PERSON WHO HAS PAID MONEY FOR PURCHASE OF THE LAND AND SOME OF THE ASSESSEE COU LD NOT PRODUCE THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE OF ITS UNAVAILABILITY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS WITHOUT ANY REASON OR WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AS SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN ONLY. 9. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. APPARENTLY, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AND ACCEPTED THE TRANSACTION OF SALE OF PROPERTY BY THE ASSESSEE RESULTING INTO THE SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS T O THE SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE THAT ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE HIGHER SUM THEN WHATEVER IS STATED IN THE COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME FROM M/S SUBASH EXHIBITORS PRIVATE LIMITED. IT IS ALSO NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT ASSESSEE HAS REC EIVED HIGHER SUM FROM THE BUYER OF THE PROPERTY. IT IS ALSO NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IS INCORRECT AND IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER PAGE 8 OF 8 OTHER HEAD OF THE INCOME SUCH AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME. IN VIEW OF THIS WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT A, IN DELETING THE ABOVE ADDITION, AS REVENUE COULD NOT PRODUCE/ADDUCE ANY EVIDENCE WITH RESPECT TO THE EARNING OF THE ABOVE SUM OF RS. 10 LACS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE RESULT GROUND N O. 5 OF THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 10. GROUND NO S . 1 AND 6 OF THE APPEAL ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND HENCE DISMISSED. 11. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 8 / 08 / 2017 . - S D / - - S D / - ( H.S.SIDHU ) (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 2 8 / 08 / 2017 A K KEOT COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI