ACIT, Meerut V. Sh. Baljeet Shing Bakshi, Meerut

ITSSA 65/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5048 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 12 year(s) 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 15-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) IT(SS) A 65/Del/2009 Assessment Year: 1997-98 to 2003-04 ACIT C– 2 Meerut Vs Sh. Baljeet Shing Bakshi 314, Arvind Puri, Meerut PAN No.AHQPB0004Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Manu Chaurasiya, Sr. DR Respondent by Sh. S. Krishnan, Advocate Sh. V. Raj Kumar Advocate Date of hearing: 09/03/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 09/03/2022 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal filed by the revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(A), Meerut dated 10.07.2009 pertaining to the block period 1997-98 to 2003-04. 2. The grievance of the revenue read as under :- 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.31 Lakh made on the basis of seized material being unexplained 2 investment, inspite of the fact the assessee could not establish the identity and genuineness of claimed lottery participants ? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in treating the amount of Rs.31 lakh as lottery payment in place of loans and advances, as from the seized material it is evident that interest could only be earned through loans and advances ? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.83,86,505/- as it is evident from seized material that the same is in the nature of interest, received on loans given ? 4. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.9.87 lakh made on account of loans and advances given as it is evident from the seized material that the interest was earned by assessee and it could only be earned through loans advanced ? 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) may be set aside and that the AO restored. 3 3. A perusal of the grievance of the revenue show that the tax effect involved in the impugned grounds is less than Rs.50 lacs, therefore, this appeal is not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. 4. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the revenue to approach the Tribunal as per the provisions of law, should it feel that the tax effect is more than Rs. 50 lakhs. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 09.03.2022 in the presence of both the rival representatives. Sd/- Sd/- (C.N. PRASAD) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *NEHA* Date:- 09.03.2022 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 4 Date of dictation Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/ PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT 09.03.2022 Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. The date on which file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order