Amarjit Motor Finance Private Limited, New Delhi V. ACIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi

ITA 9220/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6372 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 28-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATPAL GULATI; NOTICED
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure; Accommodation entries; TDS; Bogus
• Section: 132; 271(1)(c); 143(3); 153A; 133(6); 13; 22; 153C; 20

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.AS. NO.9215, 9216, 9217, 9218, 9219, 9220 & 922 1/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 , 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 AMARJIT MOTOR FINANCE PVT. LTD., SHOP NO.205, 2 ND FLOOR, AGARWAL CITY MALL ROAD NO.44, RANI BAGH, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI. TAN/PAN: AAECA1754A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAMESH GOYAL, ADV. & SHRI R.K. GUPTA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SATPAL GULATI, CIT-D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 19 01 2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 01 2021 O R D E R PER BENCH: THE AFORESAID APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER DATED 27.09.2019 PASSED BY LD. CIT (APPEALS)-XXXI, NEW DELHI FOR THE QUANTUM OF AS SESSMENT PASSED UNDER SECTION 153A R.W.S. 143(3) FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEARS 2011-12 TO 2016-17; AND SEPARATE ORDER FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 OF EVEN DATE WHICH IS PASSE D UNDER SECTION 143(3). SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN ALL THE APPEALS ARISING OUT OF IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS AND S AME REASONING GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, SAME WERE HEARD I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 2 TOGETHER AND ARE DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS CONSOLI DATED ORDER. IN NUTSHELL FOLLOWING ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN CO NFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT (A):- AY ITA NO. QUANTUM OF ADDITION (RS.) ADDITION ON A/C OF COMMISSION 2011 - 12 9215/DEL/2019 19,46,054/ - @ 2% ON RS. 9,73,02,862/- 2012 - 13 9216/DEL/2019 18,31,396/ - @ 2% ON RS. 9,15,69,783/- 2013 - 14 9217/DEL/2019 8,89,278/ - @ 2% ON RS. 44,4,63,915/- 2014 - 15 9218/DEL2019 60,15,1857 - @ 2% ON RS. 30,07,59,258/- 2015 - 16 9219/DEL/2019 26,28,215/ - @ 2% ON RS. 13,14,10,732/- 2016 - 17 9220/DEL/2019 34,48,800/ - @ 2% ON RS. 17,24,39,987/- 2017 - 18 9221/DEL/2019 22,22,900/ - @ 2% ON RS. 11,11,44,981/- 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY , M/S. AMARJEET MOTOR FINANCE LIMITED WAS INCORPORATED ON 4.4.1981 INITIALLY SITUATED IN JALANDHAR, PUNJAB UP TO 12.11.2010 AND THEREAFTER THE OFFICE WAS SHIFTED TO DELHI IN SECTOR-15, ROHINI; AND LATER ON W.E.F. 27.04.2017 I TS REGISTERED OFFICE AGAIN SHIFTED TO PITAMPURA, DELHI AND STILL RUNNING AT THE SAME ADDRESS AS PER INFORMATION GIVE N TO THE I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 3 ROC. THE COMPANY IS ALSO REGISTERED AS NBFC COMPANY VIDE REGISTRATION NO.B.06.00513 DATED 27.08.2001 WITH RE SERVE BANK OF INDIA AND HAS BEEN FILING ITS ANNUAL RETURN , I.E., NBS 9 WITH RESERVE BANK OF INDIA. AS PER MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, THE COMPANY IS DOING BUSINESS OF INVES TMENT IN SHARES AND SECURITIES AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS WH ICH ARE PERMITTED TO BE CARRIED OUT BY NBFC. SINCE BEGINNIN G IT HAS BEEN DULY ASSESSED TO INCOME TAX AND HAS BEEN REGUL ARLY FILING ITS RETURN OF INCOME AND COMPLYING WITH ALL THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AS PER THE INCOME TAX ACT AND COMPANIE S ACT. 3. AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, A SEARCH AND SEIZUR E ACTION UNDER SECTION 132 WAS CARRIED OUT ON 27.04.2016 IN SANJAY BHANDARI /OIS GROUP OF CASES, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE- COMPANY WAS ALSO COVERED IN THE SEARCH AS PER THE PANCHNAMA PLACED BEFORE US BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, I.E., 2011-12 TO 2016-17 WERE FILED AND WERE DULY ASSESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1). IN PUR SUANCE OF NOTICES ISSUED UNDER SECTION 153A FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2011-12 TO 2016-17 THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETUR N OF INCOME AND ASSESSMENT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED UNDER SEC TION 153A R.W.S. 143(3); AND THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2017-18 BEING YEAR OF SEARCH HAS BEEN COMPLETE D UNDER SECTION 143(3). 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT DURING THE C OURSE OF SEARCH ACTION WHICH WAS CARRIED OUT ON 27 TH APRIL, 2016 AT THE REGISTERED ADDRESS OF M/S. AMARJIT MOTORS PRIVATE L IMITED AND I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 4 SEVERAL OTHER COMPANIES AT G-10/ 66, GROUND FLOOR, SECTOR-15, ROHINI, WHICH WAS A RESIDENTIAL PREMISE AND NO COMP ANY, WAS FOUND TO BE RUNNING FROM THE SAID ADDRESS. THUS, TH E ACTIVITIES OF THESE COMPANIES COULD NOT BE VERIFIED . THE ASSESSING OFFICER THUS DEDUCED THAT THE ASSESSEE-CO MPANY HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE NON-EXISTENT AT THE ADDRESS GI VEN AND IS MERELY A PAPER/SHELL COMPANY. FURTHER THIS COMPANY IS CONTROLLED BY SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL, SHRI VISHNU KUMA R AGARWAL AND SRI BAL KISHAN SINGHANIA WHO ARE ENTRY OPERATORS AND THIS COMPANY IS INDULGED IN TAKING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES IN LIEU OF CASH FROM VARIOUS PAPER/ SHELL COMPANY OF SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL AND SHRI VISHN U AGRAWAL WHO HAVE PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES OF UNSECURED LOANS AND SHARE CAPITAL TO VARIOUS BENEFI CIARIES IN LIEU OF CASH. HOWEVER, NOWHERE HIS ALLEGATION IN TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER IS SUBSTANTIATED BY ANY MATERIAL O R INFORMATION OR ANY ENQUIRY CONDUCTED. THERE IS NO W HISPER HOW HE HAS COME TO THIS CONCLUSION . ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FURTHER NOTED THAT, ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS ALSO PROVI DED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND HI S GROUP COMPANIES, HOWEVER, AGAIN HIS PREMISE FOR DRA WING THIS CONCLUSION IS NOT BASED ON ANY MATERIAL OR INFORMAT ION DISCUSSED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. HE CALLED FOR TH E BANK STATEMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY AND KYC DOCUMENT S FROM BANK OF INDIA, DCB BANK, YES BANK AND INDUS IN D BANK, NEW DELHI U/S. 133(6) AND ON THE VERIFICATION OF TH E SAME HE FOUND THAT TOTAL DEPOSITS WERE AS UNDER:- I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 5 A.Y. UNION. BANK OF INDIA, A/C. NO. 307801010917 938 DCB BANK, A/E. NO. 048227000005 78 YES BANK,. A/C. NO. 000283900 0 00341 INDUSIND BANK, A/C, NO. 0169- FTO886- 050 TOTAL DEPOSITS. 2011-12 3,19,22,182 6,53,80,68 0 9,73,02,862 2012-13 4.60,41,583 1,10,000 4,54,18,200 9,15,69,783 2013-14 40,36,435 1,10,75,816 29,3 51 864 44463915 44,63,915 2014-15 30,07,13,987 45,271 30 07,59258 758 2015-16 13,14,10,732 13,14,10,732 2016-17 17,24,39,987 17,24,39,987 2017-18 11,11,44,981 11,11,44,981 5. FROM THE VERIFICATION OF THE BANK STATEMENT, ASS ESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE AMOUNTS ARE CREDITED AND THE N ARE IMMEDIATELY WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK AND THE DEBITS AND CREDITS ENTRIES SHOW THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT HAVING AN Y REAL BUSINESS; HENCE IT SHOWS THAT ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS I NDULGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO VARIOUS PERSO NS. 6. ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO NOTED THAT DURING THE COU RSE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS G ROUP COMPANIES, CERTAIN BLANK SIGNED RECEIPT OF SALE PRO CEEDS OF SHARES AND BLANK SIGNED REPAYMENT RECEIPT OF ADVANC ES GIVEN TO SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS COMPANIES WERE FOUND , IN WHICH THIS GROUP COULD NOT SOLD THE SHARES BUT HAS RECEIVED SALE CONSIDERATION. SIMILARLY, RECEIPTS WERE FOUND REGARDING PAYMENT OF UNSECURED LOAN WHICH WERE INFERRED THAT SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI HAD GIVEN CASH AGAINST SHARE CAPITAL AND SECURED LOAN RECEIVED BY HIS COMPANY WHICH ARE NOTH ING BUT ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TAKEN FROM THE ASSESSEE, ANOT HER I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 6 GROUP SHELL COMPANIES OF SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL AND SH RI VISHNU AGARWAL AND OTHERS. HE ALSO SCANNED A SAMPLE COPY OF SALE RECEIPT OF SHARES AND DEDUCED THE FOLLOWING IN FERENCE. 3. FROM THE ABOVE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT - 1. THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY A PAPER COMPANY, NO REAL BU SINESS DONE BY THE ASSESSES, 2. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS NONEXISTENT AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS INDULGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODAT ION ENTRIES TO SH. SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS COMPANIES. 4. OVERALL CONTROL ON THE ASSESSEE IS OF SH. VISHNU KUMAR AGGARWAL, SH. BAL KRTSHAN SINGHANIA AND SH. DEEPAK AGGARWAL. 5. THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN BLANK SIGNED RECEIPT TO M /S. MICROMET ATI PVT. LTD. FOR SALE PROCEED OF SHARES. THOUGH AS SESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED PAYMENT BY CHEQUE, IT MEANS THE ASSESS EE HAS RECEIVED CASH AGAINST ENTRY PROVIDED TO M/S. MICROM ET ATI. PVT. LTD. GROUP COMPANY OF SH. SANJAY BHANDARI. 7. BASED ON THIS INFERENCE, HE HAD MADE AN ADDITION OF UNACCOUNTED COMMISSION OF TOTAL DEPOSITS IN THE BAN K ACCOUNT @ 2%. FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFERENCE, THE RELEVANT FINDING AS GIVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IS REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW WHICH IS ALMOST THE SAME IN OTHER YEARS ALSO:- 14. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ONLY POPE /NON-EXISTENT COMPANY AND INDU LGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE EARNED COMMISSION IN CASH FOR PROVIDING THE ACCOMMO DATION I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 7 ENTRIES. THE PREVAILING MARKET .RATE OF COMMISSION IS 2% TO 2.25% ON THE. TOTAL CREDITS IN BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESS EE. THEREFORE, AN ADDITION OF UNACCOUNTED COMMISSION OF RS. 19,46, 054/- IN CASH IS BEING MADE @ 2% OF TOTAL DEPOSITS IN BANK O F RS.9J3,02,862/- AS PROPOSED VIDE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 17.12.2018. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ACCOMMODATION EN TRIES TAKEN BY SH. SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS GROUP COMPANIES I.E. M/S. AVAANA SOFTWARE & SERVICES PVT LTD., M/S. SANIECH I T SERVICES PVT LTD., M/S. SANTECH INVESTMENTS PVT LTD., M/S. O IS AEROSPACE PVT LTD., M/S. OIS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD.. M/ S, MICROMET ATI INDIA PVT LTD., M/S. OFFEST INDIA SOLUTIONS PVT LTD., M/S. HIMALAYAN HELICORP PVT. LTD., M/S. S B HOSPITALITY & SERVICES PVT LTD AND M/S. SANTECH ENERGY SYSTEM & SERVICES P VT LTD. WILL BE MADE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED INACCURATE PA RTICULARS OF INCOME. I AM SATISFIED THAT THE PROVISION OF SECTIO N 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT, ARE ATTRACTED ON THE ISSUE AND THEREFOR E, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WILL BE INITIA TED SEPARATELY. (ADDITION OF RS.19,46,054/-) 8. THE LD. CIT (A) AFTER INCORPORATING THE ENTIRE L EGAL AND VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS ON MERITS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS BEEN INCORPORATED TILL PAGE 33 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDE R, HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER OBSE RVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER:- 4.1. BY ADDITIONAL GROUND NO. L AND 2, THE APPELLA NT HAS CHALLENGED VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THE GROUNDS THAT THERE WAS NO VALID SEARCH IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT AND NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS AND ACCORDINGLY THE ORDERS PASSED U/S 1 53A ARE BAD I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 8 IN LAW. HOWEVER, ON PERUSAL OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO AS WELL AS MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT SEARCH WARRANT NO. 5516 WAS DULY ISSUED IN THE NAME OF AMA RJIT MOTORS FINANCE LTD FOR SEARCH ON THE PREMISES LOCATED AT. G-10/66, GROUND FLOOR, SECTOR-15, ROHINI DELHI. THE SAME ADD RESS WAS MENTIONED IN THE PAN DATABASE AND IT RETURN OF THE APPELLANT. I FIND THAT THE COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF APPELLANT C OMPANY WITH DCS BANK PLACED ON RECORD FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.04 .2015 TO 21.03.2016 ALSO SHOWS ADDRESS OF APPELLANT COMPANY AS 6- 10/66,. GROUND FLOOR, SECTOR-15, ROHINI, DELHI, THE WARRANT WAS DULY EXECUTED, ON 27.04,2016 AS IS EVIDENT FROM COP Y OF PANCHNAMA PLACED ON RECORD. BOTH THE SEARCH WARRANT AND PANCHNAMA WERE PROVIDED TO THE APPELLANT AND THE SA ME WERE NOT CONTROVERTED IN THE REJOINDER BY THE LD. AR, TH EREFORE, I HOLD THAT THERE WAS CONDUCT, OF A SEARCH U/S 132 IN THE NAME AND AT THE PREMISES OF THE APPELLANT. ACCORDINGLY I FURTHE R HOLD THAT THE AO HAD RIGHTLY INITIATED THE PROCEEDINGS U /S 1.53A , 4.1.1. AS REGARDS THE CLAIM OF APPELLANT THAT NO IN CRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND AS A RESULT OF SEARCH CONDUCTED ON APPELLANT, I FIND, THAT AS RESULT OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION IN THE EASE OF SH. SANJAY BHANDARI/OIS GROUP, THE DEPARTMENT WAS I N POSSESSION OF INFORMATION THAT THE APPELLANT BEING A SHELL ENTITY WAS ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES OF S HARE CAPITAL/.LOANS ETC. AS A MATTER OF FACT, ENTITIES P ROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES ARE THOSE .WHICH ARE NOT ENGA GED IN GENUINE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND THE SEARCH, U/S 132 AT THE PREMISES SHOWN IN THE INCOME TAX RECORDS CLEARLY RE VEALED THAT THE APPELLANT COMPANY WAS NOT EXISTING AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS. IN FACT, THAT PREMISES WAS A RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OCCU PIED BY A I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 9 FAMILY AND HENCE THE SEARCH ACTION U/S 132 HAS PROVED THAT APPELLANT COMPANY WAS A PAPER ENTITY NOT DOING ANY REAL BUSINESS AND ENGAGED MERELY IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODAT ION ENTRIES. THEREFORE, I HOLD THAT THIS VITAL INFORMAT ION IS AN INCRIMINATING MATERIAL TO INITIATE THE ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS U/S. 153A AND MAKING CONSEQUENTIAL ADDITION, UNDISPUTEDL Y, VARIOUS BLANK RECEIPTS DULY SIGNED BY THE- APPELLANT, COMPA NY WERE FOUND AT THE PREMISES OF 8H, SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS GROU P COMPANIES FOR RECEIPT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF SHARES AND REPAYMEN T OF LOAN. THESE DOCUMENTS ALSO ESTABLISHED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD ALREADY DISCHARGED ITS CLAIM ON THE SHARE CAPITAL/LOANS GIV EN THROUGH ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES SINCE, THE CONSIDERATION IN C ASH FOR THE SAME HAD ALREADY BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ENTRY PROVIDE RS. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. AR BECOME DISTINGUISHABLE ON FACTS BECAUSE IN T HOSE CASES PARTICULARLY IN THE CASE OF KABUL CHAWLA (SUPRA), T HERE WAS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND AS A RESULT OF SEARCH. ACCORDINGLY, I UPHOLD THE BASIS OF ADDITION, MADE U/S 153A, HENCE ADDITIONAL GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 BEING WITHOUT ANY BASIS ARE DISM ISSED. 4.2. OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL FROM. 1 TO 4 RAISED I N FORM NO. 35 ARE GENERAL, IN NATURE REGARDING VALIDITY OF ASS ESSMENT AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISION REGARDING ADDITIONAL GROUND NO . 1 AND 2, THE SAME BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND HENCE NO SPECIFIC ADJUD ICATION, IS SEPARATELY REQUIRED. 4.3. GROUND NO. 5 TO 9 ARE PERTAINING TO ASSESSMEN T OF 2% COMMISSION INCOME ON ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED TO VARIOUS COMPANIES OF SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP. AS ALREADY DISC USSED, IN PARA 4.1 TO 4.1.1. ABOVE, THE APPELLANT COMPANY WAS FOUND TO BE A SHELL ENTITY NOT CARRYING OUT ANY GENUINE BUSINES S. THE AO HAD I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 10 EXAMINED THE BANK ACCOUNTS FOR APPELLANT COMPANY AN D NOTICED THAT THE CREDITS RECEIVED, IN BANK ACCOUNTS WERE TR ANSFERRED IMMEDIATELY TO BENEFICIARIES. THE AO HAS ALSO IDENT IFIED CERTAIN BENEFICIARIES OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES SUCH AS SH. SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS GROUP COMPANIES I.E. M/S. AVAANA S OFTWARE &.- SERVICES PVT. LTD., M/S. SANTECH IT SERVICES PVT. L TD., M/S. SANTECH INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.. M/S. OIS AEROSPACE P VT. LTD., M/S. OIS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD., M/S. MICROMET AT I INDIA. PVT LTD., M/S. OFFEST INDIA SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., M/S. H IMALAYAN HELICORP PVT. LTD., M/S. S B HOSPITALITY & SERVICES PVT LTD. AND M/S. SANTECH ENERGY SYSTEM 8S SERVICES PVT LTD. THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AO IN THE HANDS OF THESE BENEFICIARIES. IT IS ALSO NOTICE D THAT CERTAIN BLANK RECEIPTS DULY SIGNED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY , A SAMPLE OF WHICH IS PLACED IN PARA 12 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WERE FOUND AND SEIZED IN THE CASE OF SH. SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP . THROUGH, THESE RECEIPTS, THE APPELLANT COMPANY HAD DISCHARGE D ITS CLAIM ON SHARES/LOANS GIVEN TO THE BENEFICIARIES NAMELY MICR OMET ATI INDIA PVT LTD, HB HOSPITALITY AND SERVICES PVT LTD ETC. THESE FACTS CLEARLY ESTABLISH THAT THE APPELLANT HAS PROVIDED O NLY THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES OF SHARE CAPITAL/LOANS TO THE BENEFICIARIES THROUGH ITS BANK ACCOUNTS. AS A PREVAILING PRACTICE , COMMISSION ON ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES A CHARGED BY THE ENTRY PRO VIDER AND ACCORDINGLY THE AO HAS ASSESSED 2% COMMISSION INCOM E ON ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMST ANCES, THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. AR ARE NOT APPLICA BLE IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT. THEREFORE, I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMIT Y IN THE ORDER OF AO ASSESSING THE COMMISSION INCOME. ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO ON THIS ACCOUNT IN RESPECTIVE ASSESS MENT YEARS ARE CONFIRMED AND GROUND 5 TO 9 ARE DISMISSED. I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 11 9. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HERE IN THIS CASE, FIRST OF ALL NO I NCRIMINATING MATERIAL WHATSOEVER WAS FOUND FROM THE POSSESSION O F THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY AND NOTHING WAS RECOVERED FROM THE REGISTERED OFFICE OF THE COMPANY. EVEN THE ADDITION S WHICH HAVE BEEN MADE ARE NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING M ATERIAL FOUND FROM ASSESSEES POSSESSION WHICH CAN BE SAID TO BE RELATING TO RESULT OF ANY SEARCH. IN SO FAR AS THE ALLEGATION MADE BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS FOUND TO BE NON-EXISTENT AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN, IS INCORRECT. TH E REGISTERED OFFICE OF THE COMPANY AS PER RECORDS WAS DULY SHOWN AND DISCLOSED IN THE STATUTORY RECORDS. AND ALL THE COMMUNICATIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE COMPANY AT THE SAID ADDRESS ONLY. LATER ON, THE ADDRESS OF ROHINI WAS SHIFTED TO UNIT NUMBER 205, SECOND FLOOR, AGGARWAL CITY MAL L, ROAD NO.44 PITAMPURA, DELHI. IT HAS BEEN FILING THE RETU RN OF INCOME WITH INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ROC AND RBI FROM ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SINCE BEGINNING, AND THEREFORE, S UCH AN ALLEGATION OF THE AO IS COMPLETELY BASELESS. ONE VE RY IMPORTANT FACT, HERE IN THIS CASE, IS THAT WHICH IS ALSO EVIDENT FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT, NEITHER THE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED ON THE DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY NOR ON AN Y OFFICIAL OR AUTHORIZED PERSON OF THE COMPANY. APART FROM THA T, NEITHER ANY DOCUMENT WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS EITHER FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSES SEE COMPANY OR ITS DIRECTORS. 10. LD. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT, ONE OF THE DOCUMENT I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 12 WHICH HAS BEEN REFERRED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WA S FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH OF SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS GROUP, WHICH IS A BLANK RECEIPT WITHOUT ANY MENTION OF ANY FIGURES. THUS, IF THERE IS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIA L FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS U/S. 132 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THEN THERE IS NO MATERIAL FOR FRAMI NG THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A ESPECIALLY WHEN MOST OF THE ASSESSMENTS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH WERE UNABATED. IN SUPPORT, HE STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE DEL HI HIGH COURT IN THE CASES OF; PCIT VERSUS MEETA GUTGUTIYA, 395 ITR526; AND CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA, 380 ITR 573 . THE ENTIRE OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BASE D ON PRESUMPTIONS AND SURMISES THAT ASSESSEE IS A SHELL COMPANY AND AT THE SAME TIME NON-EXISTING. THE ADDITION WHI CH HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BY TAKING 2% OF ALLEGED NOTIONAL COMMISSION ON THE ENTIRE DEPOSIT, WHICH IS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS OR MATERIAL ON REC ORD. 11. FURTHER, IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HAS NAMED 10 COMPANIES WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAD NO DEALING WITH 7 OF THESE COMPANIES. OUT OF SAID C OMPANIES, ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD FOLLOWING TRANSACTION DURING T HE YEAR:- S.NO. NAME OF THE COMPANY AMOUNT (RS.) REMARK 1. AVAANA SOFTWARE & SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. 5,50,000/ - INVESTMENT SOLD 2. MICROMET ATI INDIA PVT. LTD. 50,00,000/ - INVESTMENT MADE IN UNQUOTED SHARES 3. SB HOSPITILITY & SERVICES PVT. LTD. 75,00,000/ - INVESTMENT MADE IN UNQUOTED SHARES I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 13 12. THUS, FROM THESE COMPANIES THERE WERE TOTAL T RANSACTION OF RS.1,30,50,000/- ONLY. ALL THE OBSERVATION AND T HE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS AGAIN BASED ON SURMISES AND PR ESUMPTION WITHOUT ANY BASIS OF MAKING THE ADDITION OF NOTIONA L COMMISSION INCOME. THUS, THE ENTIRE ADDITION SHOULD BE DELETED. 13. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. CIT-DR HAS STRONGLY RELI ED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT(A) A ND ALSO GIVEN HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSION, WHICH IS REPRODUCED H ERE UNDER:- 1. DURING THE HEARING PROCEEDINGS, THE AR OF THE AS SESSEE CLAIMED THAT THE ASSESSEE/PREMISES BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT COVERED IN THE SEARCH AND IT HAS NO RELATIO N WITH THE SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP (SEARCHED GROUP) IN ANY MANNE R. IN RESPONSE TO THIS, THE HON'BLE MEMBER RAISED CERTAIN QUERIES WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO BE REQUISITIONED FROM THE CONCERN ED ASSESSING OFFICER. THE AO HAS SUBMITTED RESPONSE TO THE QUERI ES RAISED BY THE HON'BLE MEMBER. THE SAME IS AS UNDER:- S.NO . QUERY CLARIFICATION 1. WHETHER THE ASSESSEE /PREMISES BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS COVERED DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION ON THE SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP YES THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COVERED DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT OF 1961. ON 27.04.2016 ALONG WITH OTHER CASES OF SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 14 2. IF THE ASSESSEE PREMISES BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WAS COVERED IN THE SEARCH OPERATION OF SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP? WHAT WAS THE BASIS OF SEARCH AND THE FINDING THERE UPON OF THAT SEARCH? THE DEPARTMENT WAS IN POSSESSION OF INFORMATION THAT GROUP COMPANIES OF SANJAY BHANDARI (NAMELY SB HOSPITALITY & SERVICES PVT LTD, AVAANA SOFTWARE & SERVICES PVT LTD, MICROMET ATI INDIA PVT LTD ETC.) HAVE TAKEN BOGUS ENTRIES OF SHARE CAPITAL ALONG WITH HUGE PREMIUM. SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI HAS ROUTED HIS UNACCOUNTED INCOME THROUGH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ANT! BROUGHT BACK INTO THE BOOKS OF HIS GROUP COMPANY IN THE FORM OF INVESTMENTS. THE SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE REGISTERED ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY I.E. AT G~ 10/66, GROUND FLOOR, SECTOR-15, ROHINI. DELHI. DURING THE SEARCH, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS FOUND NONEXISTENT AT THE REGISTERED ADDRESS. ALSO, INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS LIKE SIGNED BUT BLANK SHARES TRANSFER ISSUED FROM S.B, HOSPITALITY AND SERVICES PVT LID (COMPANY OF SANJAY BHANDARI) WAS FOUND. FURTHER, IN HIS STATEMENT ON OATH SH SANJAY BHANDARI ADMITTED TO HAVE TAKEN BOGUS ENTRIES OF SHARE CAPITAL WITH HUGE PREMIUM FROM THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 3. WHAT WAS THE CO-RELATION OF THE SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP WITH THAT OF THE ASSESSEE/PREMISES BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE FOR WHICH, IF IT WAS COVERED DURING THE SEARCH? THE GROUP COMPANIES OF SANJAY BHANDARI (NAMELY SB J HOSPITALITY &SRVICES PVT LTD, AVAANA SOFTWARE &: SERVICES PVT LTD, MICROMCT ATI INDIA PVT LTD ETC) HAVE | TAKEN BOGUS ENTRIES OF SHARE CAPITAL ALONG WITH HUGE I PREMIUM FROM THE ASSESSES COMPANY. SH SANJAY J BHANDARI HAS ROUTED HIS UNACCOUNTED INCOME THROUGH THE 1 ASSESSEC COMPANY AND BROUGHT BACK INTO THE BOOKS OF HIS GROUP COMPANY IN THE FORM OF INVESTMENTS. I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 15 4. WHAT WAS THE BASIS OF ASSESSMENT IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2015- 16, 2016-17 AND 2017- 18? THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ONLY A PAPER COMPANY, NO REAL BUSINESS DONE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS NONEXISTENT AT THE GIVEN REGISTERED ADDRESS. I HE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS INDULGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO SH SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS GROUP COMPANIES. OVERALL CONTROL ON THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS OF SH VISHNU KUMAR AGARWAL, SH BAL KRISHNA SINGHANIA AND SH DEEPAK AGARWAL. THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN BLANK SIGNED RECEIPT TO M/S MICROMET ATI PVT. LTD, (GROUP COMPANY OF SH. SANJAY | BHANDARI) FOR SALE PROCEED OF SHARES. THOUGH ASSESSEE I HAS NOT RECEIVED PAYMENT BY CHEQUE, IT MEANS THE | ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED CASH AGAINST ENTRY PROVIDED TO M/S. MICROMET ATI PVT. LTD AND HAVE EARNED COMMISSION FOR J PROVIDING THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THEREFORE, ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED COMMISSION AT 2% OF TOTAL DEPOSITS IN BANK WAS MADE FOR THE A. YRS. 2011- : 12 TO 2017-18. I HE DETAILS OF ADDITIONS (ASSESSMENT YEAR WISE) AS REQUIRED ARE AS UNDER: ASSTT. YEAR AMOUNT (RS.) 2015 - 16 26,28,215/ - 2016 - 17 34,48,800/ - 2017 - 18 22,22,900/ - 5. IN CASE THE ASSESSEE/ PREMISES BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE COVERED IN THE SEARCH OF SANJAY BHANDARI GROUP THE RELEVANT COPY OF PANCHANAMA DRAWN, COPY OF AUTHORIZATION / WARRANT ETC. MAY BE PROVIDED TO THE HONBLE BENCH. COPY OF WARRANT OF AUTHORIZATION U/S.132 NO.5516 DATED 27.04.2016 IS ENCLOSED. I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 16 2. FURTHER, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS OF THE P RESENT CASE ARE PECULIAR. IT IS A CASE WHERE SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTIO N TOOK PLACE AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY. HOWEVER, DURING SEARCH ACTION, IT WAS FOUND THAT NO SUCH COMPANY WAS RUNNI NG AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS. FINDING OF A FACT DURING SEARCH ACTION THA T THE SAID COMPANY IS ONLY ON PAPER FURTHER GETS CORROBORATED FROM THE FACT THAT THIS COMPANY WAS MANAGED BY ACCOMMODATION ENTR Y PROVIDER SH. DEEPAK AGGARWAL. GOING BY THE PRINCIPLE LAID DO WN BY HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KABUL CHAWLA (ITA N O. 707/2014) REGARDING FINDING OF INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE, IT IS TO HIGHLIGHT THAT THE FACT OF NON-EXISTENT COMPANY IS AN INCRIMINATING IN FORMATION GATHERED DURING THE SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTION. THE SP IRIT BEHIND THE DECISION OF DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KABUL C HAWLA (SUPRA) IS THAT THESE HAS TO BE SOME INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT/ F INDING/ INFORMATION WHICH WOULD NOT HAVE COME TO LIGHT IN T HE ABSENCE OF SEARCH & SEIZURE ACTION. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE F INDING OF FACT OF APPELLANT ENTITY AS NON-EXISTENT ENTITY/PAPER COMPA NY IS INCRIMINATING FINDING BASED ON SEARCH ACTION. THUS, ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THIS CASE BASED ON THE OBSERVATION MADE DUR ING SEARCH FOR ABATED AS WELL AS UNABATED ASSESSMENTS. IT MAY BE RELEVANT TO ADD THAT THIS COMPANY IS IN T HE LIST OF HIGH RISK NBFC AS PER HTTPS://CENTRIK.IN/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/2018/03/LIST- OF-HIGH-RISK-NBFCS-AS-ON-31.01.2018 PDF. DECISION 14. WE HAVE HEARD THAT RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT FINDING GIVEN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS A S WELL AS THE MATERIAL REFERRED TO BEFORE US. THE ENTIRE BASI S OF THE ADDITIONS WHICH HAS BEEN MADE IN THE IMPUGNED APPEA LS ARE I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 17 THAT; FIRSTLY , THE ASSESSEE WAS FOUND TO BE NON-EXISTING COMPANY AT THE TIME OF SEARCH; SECONDLY , IT IS A PAPER/ SHELL COMPANY OF SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL, SHRI VISHNU AGARWAL AND SHRI BAL KRISHNA SINGHANIA, WHO WERE ENTRY OPERATORS AND LATER TWO O F THEM ARE RESIDENTS OF KOLKATA; THIRDLY , THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAS INDULGED IN TAKING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY IN LIEU OF CASH FROM VARIOUS PAPER/ SHELL COMPANY OF SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL AND SHR I VISHNU AGARWAL; FOURTHLY , DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS GROUP COMPANY CERTAIN BLANK SIGNED RECEIPT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF SHARES AND BLANK SIGNED REPAYMENT RECEIPT OF ADVANCES GIVEN TO SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS COMPANY WERE FOUND FROM HIS POSSESSION. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO GIVEN BLANK SIGNE D RECEIPT TO IT, M/S. MIRCOMET ATI PVT. LTD. FOR SALE PROCEEDS OF SHARES. THOUGH ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVE D ANY PAYMENT BY CHEQUE WHICH WAS INFERRED AS IF THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED CASH AGAINST ENTRY PROVIDED B Y THE GROUP COMPANY OF SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI. 15. BASED ON THE AFORESAID PREMISE, ASSESSING OFFIC ER HAS HELD THAT ASSESSEE IS PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRI ES, FOR WHICH ASSESSEE MIGHT HAVE EARNED COMMISSION AS PER THE PREVAILING MARKET RATE OF 2% TO 2.25% ON THE TOTAL CREDITS ON I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 18 THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS FURTHER OB SERVED THAT ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES T AKEN BY SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND HIS GROUP COMPANIES FOR WHI CH LIST OF 10 COMPANIES HAVE BEEN GIVEN WILL BE MADE IN THE IR HANDS, HOWEVER WHAT HAS BEEN THE FATE OF THE ASSESSMENTS O R ADDITIONS MADE IN HANDS OF THESE COMPANIES HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BEFORE US NOR THERE IS ANY WHISPE R IN THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER OR IN THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BEFORE US. 16. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS, IT IS SEEN THAT, FIRSTLY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS VERY OLD COMPANY INCORPORAT ED WAY BACK ON 4 TH APRIL, 1991 AND HAS BEEN DULY REGISTERED AS NBFC WITH RBI. SINCE THEN ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS BEEN REGU LARLY FILING ITS RETURN WITH INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, RETURNS WITH ROC UNDER THE COMPANIE S ACT AND ALSO BEFORE RBI, BEING NBFC. IT HAS BEEN REGULA RLY FILING ITS RETURN OF INCOME ALONG WITH AUDITED ACCOUNTS. T HE BALANCE-SHEET AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2011 REFLECTS SHARE CAPITAL RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF MORE THAN RS. 20.65 CRORES. IT HAS INVESTMENTS OF MORE THAN RS. 18.27 CRORES AND LOANS AND ADVANCES GIVEN FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSE WAS AT RS.2 .43 CRORE AND CASH AND BANK BALANCE OF APPROXIMATELY RS. 10 L AKHS. THE INTEREST INCOME HAS BEEN SHOWN AT RS.19.65 LAKH S. SAME IS THE POSITION IN ALL THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS BALANC E-SHEETS. THUS, IT CANNOT BE HELD THAT IT IS NON-EXISTING COM PANY HAVING NO REAL BUSINESS. I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 19 17. ADMITTEDLY, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH NOTHIN G INCRIMINATING OR ANY IOTA OF DOCUMENT HAS BEEN FOUN D OR SEIZED FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. IN FACT, AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF NOTHING WAS FOUN D FROM THE POSSESSION OF ASSESSEE AS NO ONE WAS PRESENT AT THE PREMISES. THE ENTIRE PREMISE HAS BEEN DRAWN ON THE BASIS OF C ERTAIN INFORMATION IN POSSESSION WITH THE DEPARTMENT FROM THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OF GROUP COMPANIES OF SHRI SANJAY BHANDARI AND FROM THERE IT HAS BEEN GATHERED THAT T HE ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS ENGAGED IN SOME ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEN WHAT INFORMATION O R MATERIAL PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS FOUND OR UNE ARTHED WHICH WAS HANDED OVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ANOTHE R ALLEGATION IS THAT THIS COMPANY IS CONTROLLED AND U SED FOR ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PURPOSES BY SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL AND SHRI VISHNU AGARWAL. THE LEARNED COUNSEL HAS CLARIF IED THAT NEITHER SHRI DEEPAK AGARWAL NOR SHRI VISHNU AGRAWAL ARE RELATED TO THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY NOR THEY WERE DIREC TORS. FURTHER, THE DOCUMENT WHICH HAS BEEN REFERRED IN TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS NEITHER BEEN FOUND FROM THE PO SSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE NOR IT HAS BEEN CONFRONTED TO ASSES SEE NOR ANY PERSON WAS EXAMINED WHEREIN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSE E- COMPANY HAS BEEN IMPLICATED. THIS MATERIAL ITSELF C ANNOT BE HELD TO BE FOUND FROM THE SEARCH CONDUCTED IN THE C ASE OF THE ASSESSEE. IN CASE, IF SUCH A MATERIAL FOUND FROM TH E SEARCH OF A DIFFERENT PERSON, THEN THE SAME SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED THERE IN THAT CASE OR SATISFACTION SHOUL D HAVE BEEN I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 20 RECORDED IN TERMS OF 153C AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. IN SO FAR AS THIS MATTER IS CONCERNED IT CANNOT BE RECKONED AS A N INCRIMINATING MATERIAL TO MAKE ASSESSMENT UNDER SEC TION 153A. MOREOVER, THIS PAPER HAS BEEN RECOVERED FROM A THIRD PARTY AND IS PURELY A BLANK PAPER WITHOUT ANY MENTI ON OF YEAR OR ANY AMOUNT SO THIS CANNOT BE BASIS FOR ANY INFER ENCE OR ADDITION. NOWHERE, IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TH AT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS A BENAMI OF SOME OTHER GROUP OR INDIVIDUAL. IN THAT CASE ALSO IF ANY ADDITION OR AN Y ADVERSE INFERENCE AT ALL COULD HAVE BEEN MADE THEN SAME SHO ULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN CASE OF THAT PERSON. HERE, THE ENTIRE ADDITION IS BASED ON SOME NOTIONAL PRESUMPTION OF COMMISSION ON ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. FIRST OF ALL, THE DEPARTMENT H AS TO ESTABLISH THAT ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY ESPECIALLY WHEN DURING THE COUR SE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE NOTHING HAS BEEN FOU ND THAT ASSESSEE WAS INDULGED IN ANY KIND OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. IF AT ALL THERE WAS ANY INFORMATION OF THIRD-PARTY CAS E THEN WITHOUT BRINGING ON RECORD AS TO WHAT INFERENCE HAS BEEN DRAWN AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN THOSE CASES OR ANY SU BSTANTIVE ADDITION HAVE BEEN MADE IN THOSE CASES, NOTIONAL AD DITION CANNOT BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 18. THE CONTENTION OF LD. CIT-DR IS THAT THE ASSE SSEE- COMPANY WAS NOT FOUND AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS DURING T HE SEARCH, AND ITSELF CONSTITUTES AN INCRIMINATING EVI DENCE CANNOT BE UPHELD, BECAUSE WHEN AN ACTION HAS BEEN T AKEN UNDER SECTION 153A THEN THE BASIC PREMISE IS THAT T HE I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 21 ADDITION HAS TO BE BASED ON SOMETHING FOUND OR UNEA RTH DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF THE ASSE SSEE FOR A PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YEAR ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE O F UNABATED ASSESSMENT. HERE, IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201112 TO 201516 HAD ATTAINED FIN ALITY. THE PERIOD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16 AND 2016 -17 NOTHING HAS BEEN FOUND FROM ANY ENQUIRY OR CARRIED OUT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE WAS PROVIDIN G ANY ACCOMMODATION ENTRY AND THE BUSINESS CARRY ON BY TH E ASSESSEE IS SHAM OR PAPER TRANSACTION, HENCE THE AD DITION CANNOT BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF ANY HYPOTHESIS PRESU MPTION ALBEIT IT HAS TO BE BASED ON EVIDENCES OR MATERIAL OR ENQ UIRY CONDUCTED. THE ADDITION HERE IN THIS CASE HAS PUREL Y BEEN MADE ON SURMISES AND PRESUMPTION THAT ASSESSEE MIGH T HAVE EARNED 2% COMMISSION ON ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. THIS APPROACH IS UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND ON FACTS. AT L EAST, THERE HAS TO BE A CONCRETE FINDING WITH MATERIAL THAT ASS ESSEE WAS FOUND TO BE CARRYING OUT SHADY ACCOMMODATION ENTRY TRANSACTION. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO UPHOLD THE ALLEGED COMMISSION INCOME IN ALL THE YEARS. 19. APART FROM THAT, WE FIND FROM THE RECORDS AS REFERRED TO AT THE TIME OF HEARING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING REGULAR INCOME AND REVENUE FROM OPERATION IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME AND AUDITED ACCOUNTS WHICH FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEA L HAVE BEEN GIVEN AS UNDER:- I.T.A. NO. 9215 TO 9221/DEL/2019 22 ASSTT. YEAR INTT. INCOME SALES TURNOVER TOTAL REVENUE TDS DEDUCTED 2011 - 12 19,64,441/ - 19,64,441/ - 1,93,066/ - 2012 - 13 12,65,995/ - 12,65,995/ - 1,25,639/ - 2013 - 14 10,29,834/ - 56,23,355/ - 66,53,189/ - 1,02,305/ - 2014 - 15 1,08,69,552/ - 5,78,662/ - 1,14,48,214/ - 9,45,550/ - 2015 - 16 1,21,78,234/ - 48,72,000/ - 1,70,50,234/ - 11,67,833/ - 2016 - 17 1,15,53,420/ - 1,15,53,420/ - 11,17,565/ - 2017 - 18 1,12,90,225/ - 80,88,952/ - 1,93,79,177/ - 5 ,32,537/ - 20. THUS, IT CANNOT BE HELD THAT ASSESSEE IS PAPER COMPANY OR WAS EARNING INCOME WAS ON THE BASIS OF ALLEGED COMMISSION ON ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. 21. IN THE RESULT, THE ADDITIONS MADE IN ALL THE YE ARS ARE DELETED AND ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JANUARY, 2021 SD/- SD/- [B.R.R. KUMAR] [AMIT SHUKLA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH JANUARY, 2021 PKK: