DCIT, New Delhi v. M/s. Emperor International Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 422/DEL/2010 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 42220114 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AABCE2810J
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 422/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, New Delhi
Respondent M/s. Emperor International Ltd., New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 25-02-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 25-02-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 02-12-2010
Next Hearing Date 02-12-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 29-01-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH : B NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.D.JAIN J UDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.75/DEL./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) M/S EMPEROR INTERNATIONAL LTD. VS. DCIT CIRCLE 11( 1) E-18 MODEL TOWN NEW DELHI. DELHI. (PAN/GIR NO.AABCE2810J) AND I.T.A. NO.422/DEL./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) DCIT CIRCLE 11(1) VS. M/S EMPEROR INTERNATIONAL LT D. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VED JAIN/MS.RANO JAIN/V. MOHAN REVENUE BY : SHRI Y. KAKKAR SR.DR ORDER PER A.D. JAIN JM THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. THE O NLY EFFECTIVE GROUND IN ITA NO.75/DEL./2010 RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF ` 2 65 000 ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED. 2. THE DEPARTMENT IN ITS APPEAL IN ITA NO.422/DEL./2 010 HAS CONTENDED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE DISA LLOWANCE OF `24 55 000 (WRONGLY MENTIONED IN GROUND NO.2 AS `27 00 000) MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. 3. THE REGISTRY HAS TAKEN AN OBJECTION THAT IN THE ASSE SSEES APPEAL THE APPEAL FILING FEE IS SHORT BY `9500. IN THIS REGARD IN GILBS COMPUTERS LTD. VS. ITAT & OTHERS 317 ITR 159 (BOM.). IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN MADE AT A ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 2 LOSS THE ASSESSEE CAN BE SAID TO HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AT A NIL INCOME OR ASSESSED TO AGGREGATE LOSS; THAT IN EITHER CASES SECTION 25 3(6)(A) OF THE I.T. ACT WOULD APPLY AS THE INCOME COMPUTED WAS L ESS THAN `1 00 000; THAT FURTHER CLAUSES (A) (B) OR (C) OF SECT ION 253(6) OF THE ACT POSTULATE ASSESSMENT AT A POSITIVE FIGURE AND THUS NONE O F THEM CAN APPLY; THAT IT IS ONLY CLAUSE (D) OF SECTION 253(6) OF THE ACT WHICH APPLIES FEE PAYABLE WOULD BE `500. IN THE ASSESSEES C ASE THE INCOME HAS BEEN ASSESSED AT A LOSS OF `91 38 741 AS AGAINST A RETURNED LOSS OF `64 18 741 AND SO AS PER GILBS COMPU TERS LTD. VS. ITAT & OTHERS THE APPEAL FILING FEE HAS BEEN RIGHTL Y PAID AT `500. 4. APROPOS THE MERITS OF THE CASE THE FACTS ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SALE AND PURCHASE O F SHARES. FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. AY 2005-06 THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING A LOSS OF `91 32 050 FR OM BUSINESS ACTIVITIES THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE A CT. THEREAFTER THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. 5. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAD RAISED ITS PAID UP C APITAL TO `62 05 000 BY ALLOTTING SHARES TO THE FOLLOWING PARTI ES: S.NO. NAME NO.OF SHARES AMOUNT 1. MR. ASHOK GUPTA 8000 80 000 2. MS.KAVERI GUPTA 9000 90 000 3. MR. GAURAV GUPTA 9500 95 000 4. M/S BAMPSL 100000 10 00 000 5. M/S JAIN PROJECT & FINANCIAL 50000 5 00 000 CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. 6. M/S M.V. MARKETING P. LTD. 100000 10 00 000 7. M/S NEW AGE INFOSYS P. LTD. 63500 6 35 000 8. M/S SUNIL KANSAL & SONS P. LTD. 35000 3 50 000 9. M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES P. LTD. 245500 24 55 00 0 6. CONSIDERING THAT ALLOTMENT OF SHARES TO 4 PARTIES OU T OF THE ABOVE I.E. M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. ASHOK GU PTA MS. KAVERI GUPTA & GAURAV GUPTA WAS BOGUS THE AO QUERIED THE A SSESSEE. ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 3 7. SO FAR AS REGARDS M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. I T WAS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF `24 55 000 FROM THEM. THE ASSESSEE FILED A COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF THE SAID COMPANY AND ALSO A COPY OF INCOME-TAX ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIP T AND CONFIRMATION FROM THE PARTIES. THE AO OBSERVED FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT THAT THE PARTY HAD DEPOSITED CASH OF `2 50 00 0 ON 18.10.04 AND HAD GOT `2 50 000 EACH FROM CA NOS.9372 AND 9367 ON 19.10.04; THAT ON THE VERY SAME DATE M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIE S LTD. HAD GIVEN AN AMOUNT OF `6 00 000 TO THE ASSESSEE; THAT SIMILARLY ON 25.10.04 M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. HAD DEPOSITED `4 00 00 0 IN CASH AND HAD GOT `3 00 000 EACH FROM CA NOS.9372 AND 9367; TH AT ON 26.10.04 M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. HAD GIVEN AN AMOUNT O F `8 00 000 TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY; THAT ON THE SAME DATE THE ASSESSEE HAD DEP OSITED `1 00 000 IN CASH AND THERE WAS A TRANSFER OF `3 00 00 0 FROM ACCOUNT NO.44355 CDD OF `1 00 000; THAT ON THE SAME DATE A SUM OF `7 50 000 HAD BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY; THAT ON 30.10.04 THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED `50 000 AND `1 50 000 IN CASH; THAT `3 00 000 EACH HAD BEEN TRANSFERRED FROM CA NOS.9372 AND 9367 AND THAT ON 1.11.04 M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. HAD ISSUED A CHEQUE OF `10 00 000 TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 8. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN AFFIDAVIT FROM M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. STATING THAT M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. HAD CONTRIBUTED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY VIDE CHEQUES. 9. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE TRANSFER ENTRIES WERE FROM OTHER ACCOUNTS. AS SUCH COPIES OF BANK ACCOUNT NOS.44355 93 72 AND 9367 WERE CALLED FROM THE BANK THEREFROM THE AO OBSERVED THAT IN THESE ACCOUNTS ALSO THE AMOUNT HAD BEEN DEPOSITED IN CASH BEF ORE ISSUANCE OF CHEQUES TO M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. FROM TH IS THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ROUTED ITS MONEY THROUGH T HE BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. AND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF M/S NOR TH INDIA ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 4 SECURITIES LTD. AS CHEQUES HAD BEEN ISSUED AFTER DEPOSIT OF CASH. THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FORM M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES LTD. WAS THUS TREATED BY THE AO AS NON-GENUINE AND BROUGHT IT TO TAX AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 9. CONCERNING THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED I N CASH FROM ASHOK GUPTA MS. KAVERI GUPTA AND GAURAV GUPTA THE A SSESSEE FILED BEFORE THE AO COPY OF INCOME-TAX ACKNOWLEDGEMENT R ECEIPT AND CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE PARTIES. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED INCOME OF ALMOST THE SAME AMOUNT IN THE RETURN FILED. OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO GIVE TH E SOURCE OF THE CASH DEPOSITED BY THESE PERSONS AND THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIE S THE AO TREATED THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED AS NON-G ENUINE AND BROUGHT IT TO TAX. 10. BY VIRTUE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER THE CIT(A) PAR TLY ALLOWED THE ASSESSES APPEAL. HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF `2 65 00 0 ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM ASHOK GUUPTA MS. KAVRI GUPTA AND GAURAV GUPTA WHEREAS HE DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE OF `24 55 000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FR OM M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES P. LTD. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT ARE RESPECTIVELY IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 11. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT TH E CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF `2 65 000; T HAT WHILE DOING SO THE CIT(A) HAD FAILED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BROUGHT ALL MATERIAL AND EVIDENCE ON RECOR D TO SUPPORT HIS CONTENTION; THAT THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THIS ADDITI ON BY INDULGING SURMISES AND CONJECTURES WITHOUT BRINGING ANY ADVERSE M ATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE FACT THAT THE CIT(A) FAILED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY DISCHARGED ITS ONUS BY EST ABLISHING THE IDENTITY OF THE SHAREHOLDERS. RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACE D ON SARTHAK ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 5 SECURITIES CO. PVT. LTD. VS. ITO VIDE ORDER DATED 18.10.2010 PASSED BY THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN WP(C) NO.6087/20 10 (COPY PLACED ON RECORD). 12. THE LD.DR ON THE OTHER HAND HAS SUBMITTED THAT T HERE IS NO ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WITH REGARD TO THE CONFIRMATION OF THE ADDITION OF `2 65 000; THAT THE CIT(A) HAS CATEGORIC ALLY OBSERVED THAT IN THE CASE OF ASHOK GUPTA MS. KAVERI GUPTA AND GAURA V GUPTA THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DISCHARGED ITS BURDEN; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD REMAINED UNABLE TO GIVE THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED B Y THESE PERSONS; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE IR CREDITWORTHINESS. THE LD.DR.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE SHA REHOLDERS WHICH FACT HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED EVEN BY THE AO; AND THAT AS SUCH NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 13. APROPOS THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN DELETING TH E DISALLOWANCE OF `24 55 000 THE LD.DR HAS CONTENDED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN MAKING SUCH ALLOWANCE; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD REMAINED UN ABLE TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITI ES LTD. RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED ON AMTRAC AUTOMOTIVE P. LTD. VS. ACI T 02 ITR (TRIB.) 649. 14. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT BEFORE THE AO THE ASSESSEE FILE D COMPLETE DETAILS WITH REGARD TO THE PARTIES I.E. ASHOK GUPTA MS. KAVERI GUPTA AND GAURAV GUPTA AND M/S NORTH INDIA SECURITIES P. LT D. THESE DETAILS WERE AS UNDER: (I) THE COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION IN THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE. (II) THE COPY OF BANK STATEMENT ALONG WITH THE COPY OF CHEQUES THROUGH WHICH THE MONEY WAS RECEIVED. (III) COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF SHARE CAPITAL I.E. I N WHICH THE MONEY WAS TRANSFERRED AFTER ALLOTMENT. ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 6 (IV) COPY OF BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS A/C DEPIC TING THE SAME. (V) COPY OF ANNUAL RETURN FILED WITH REGISTRAR OF CO MPANIES WHICH INCLUDED LIST OF SHAREHOLDERS I.E. OLD AS WELL AS NEW. 15. IN ORDER TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES AN D THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS THE ASSESSEE OBTAINED THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS FROM THEM AND PRODUCED THESE DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE AO: (A) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RETURN OF INCOME. (B) BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS A/C. (C) CIN IDENTIFICATION FROM WEBSITE OF ROC (D) AFFIDAVIT FROM THE PARTIES (E) CONFIRMATION (F) AFFIDAVIT FROM DIRECTORS OF ALL COMPANIES. 16. THE ASSESSEE TOOK THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM T HE PARTIES IN ITS ORDINARY COURSE OF BUSINESS. ALL THE PARTIES WERE EXISTING DULY ASSESSED TO INCOME-TAX. FURTHER THE FACT THAT THESE PA RTIES WERE CARRYING ON THEIR BUSINESSES WAS NOT DOUBTED POINTING TO THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS. THE MONEY CAME TO THE ASSESSEE FROM THE REGULAR BANK ACCOUNTS OF ALL THE PARTIES. IT WAS NOT SHOWN OTH ERWISE. THE AO THEREFORE ERRED IN TAKING AN ADVERSE INFERENCE AGAI NST THE ASSESSEE. THEN THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED THE CORRECT NAMES AND AD DRESSES OF ALL THE PARTIES. CONFIRMATORY LETTERS WERE FILED. A LL THE MATERIAL FILED SHOWED NOT ONLY THE IDENTITIES OF THE PARTIES BUT ALSO THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. MOREOVER AS PER CIT VS. KANNAN KUNHI 87 ITR 395 (SC) THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CALLED UPON TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF ITS SOURCE. 17. FURTHER STILL THE AO HAS BROUGHT NOTHING ON RECO RD TO SHOW THAT THE MONEY INVOLVED WAS THE ASSESSEES OWN MONEY PLOUGHED BACK. THE AO HAS MERELY GONE BY THE FACTUM OF SOME CASH HAVI NG BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE PARTIES WITHOUT PROVING THAT THE MONEY WAS CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF SOME OF THE THEM WI TH WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD ENTERED INTO SOME TRANSACTIONS AND THAT SUCH M ONEY ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 7 ORIGINATED FROM THE ASSESSEE ITSELF. IN CIT VS. VALUE C APITAL SERVICES (P) LTD. 307 ITR 334 (DEL.) IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IS FOR THE REVENUE TO SHOW THAT EVEN IF THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE THE MEA NS TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT THE INVESTMENT MADE BY THE APPLICANT ACTU ALLY EMANATED FROM THE COFFERS OF THE ASSESSEE SO AS TO ENABLE IT TO BE TREATED AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 18. THOUGH THE CIT(A) NOTES AT PAGE 13 OF THE IMPUGN ED ORDER THAT THE PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM CONTAIN ED CONFIRMATIONS OF THE RESPECTIVE SHARE APPLICANTS ALONG WITH THE COPIES OF INCOME-TAX RETURNS PAN CARDS AND ELECTION CARDS E TC. AND THESE WERE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE CIT(A) THE CIT(A ) DID NOT RECORD ANY FINDING THEREON. 19. IN CIT VS. LOVELY EXPORTS 216 CTR (SC) 195 IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN DETAILS OF THE SUBSCRIBI NG SHARE APPLICANTS IN CASE THE DEPARTMENT ALLEGED THAT THE AP PLICANTS WERE BOGUS IT WAS FREE TO PROCEED AGAINST THE APPLICANTS; A ND THAT THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED COULD NOT BE REGARD ED AS UNDISCLOSED OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 20. IN CIT VS. STELLER INVESTMENT LTD. 251 ITR 263 (SC) IT WAS HELD THAT EVEN IF THE SUBSCRIBERS TO THE INCREASED SHARE CAPI TAL OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WERE NOT GENUINE THE AMOUNT COULD NOT BE REGARDED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 21. IN CIT VS. ACHAL INVESTMENT LTD. 268 ITR 211 ( DEL.) IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT EVEN IF IT BE ASSUMED THAT THE SUBSCRIBERS TO THE INCREASED SHARE CAPITAL WERE NOT GENUINE THE AMOUNT OF SHARE C APITAL CANNOT BE REGARDED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE; THAT IT MA Y THAT THERE ARE SOME BOGUS SHAREHOLDER IN WHOSE NAMES SHARES HAD BEEN ISSUED AND THE MONEY MAY HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY SOME OTHER P ERSONS; THAT IF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PERSONS WHO ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE REA LLY ADVANCED THE MONEY IS SOUGHT TO BE REOPENED THAT IS U NDERSTANDABLE ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 8 AND THAT HOWEVER THE AMOUNT OF INCREASED SHARE CAPIT AL CANNOT BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 22. IN SARTHAK SECURITIES (SUPRA) IT HAS BEEN HELD AS FOLLOWS: THE OBTAINING FACTUAL MATRIX HAS TO BE TESTED ON THE ANVIL OF THE AFORESAID PRONOUNCEMENT OF LAW. IN THE CASE AT HAND AS IS EVINCIBLE THE AO WAS AWARE OF THE EXISTENCE OF FOUR COMPANIES WITH WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAD ENTERED INTO TRANSACTION. BO TH THE ORDERS CLEARLY EXPOSIT THAT THE AO WAS MADE AWARE OF T HE SITUATION BY THE INVESTIGATION WING AND THERE IS NO ME NTION THAT THESE COMPANIES ARE FICTITIOUS COMPANIES. NEITHER THE REASONS IN THE INITIAL NOTICE NOR THE COMMUNICATION PROVIDING REASONS REMOTELY INDICATE INDEPENDENT APPLICATION OF MIND. TRUE IT IS AT THAT STAGE IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE THE ESTABLISHED F ACT OF ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME BUT WHAT IS NECESSARY IS THAT THERE IS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON WHICH A REASONABLE PERSON COULD HAVE FORMED THE REQUISITE BELIEF. TO ELABORATE THE CONC LUSIVE PROOF IS NOT GERMANE AT THIS STAGE BUT THE FORMATION OF BELIEF MUST BE ON THE BASE OR FOUNDATION OR PLATFORM OF PRUDENCE WHICH A REASONABLE PERSON IS REQUIRED TO APPLY. AS IS MANIFEST F ROM THE PERUSAL OF THE SUPPLY OF REASONS AND THE ORDER OF REJEC TION OF OBJECTIONS THE NAMES OF THE COMPANIES WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE AUTHORITY. THEIR EXISTENCE IS NOT DISPUTED. WHAT IS M ENTIONED IS THAT THESE COMPANIES WERE USED AS CONDUITS. IN THAT VIE W OF THE MATTER THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN IN LOVELY EXPORTS (P ) LTD. (SUPRA) GETS SQUARELY ATTRACTED. THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN REFERRE D TO WHILE PASSING THE ORDER OF REJECTION. THE ASSESSEE IN HI S OBJECTIONS HAD CLEARLY STATED THAT THE COMPANIES HAD B ANK ACCOUNTS AND PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. THE IDENTITY OF THE COMPA NIES WAS NOT DISPUTED. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE TO REQUIRE THE ASSESSEE TO GO THROUGH THE E NTIRE GAMUT OF PROCEEDINGS. IT IS TOTALLY UNWARRANTED. 23. AS DISCUSSED HEREINABOVE IN THE CASE AT HAND ALSO T HE EXISTENCE OF THE PARTIES HAS NEVER BEEN IN DOUBT. THE SE PARTIES HAVE NOT BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN USED AS CONDUITS. THEREFOR E LOVELY EXPORTS (SUPRA) IS DIRECTLY APPLICABLE. IN VIEW THER EOF THE CASE LAWS CITED BY THE LD.DR. I.E. AMTRAC AUTOMOTIVE INDIA P. LTD. VS. ACIT (SUPRA) DOS NOT HELP THE CASE OF THE DEPARTMENT. ITA NOS.75 & 422/DEL./2010 (AY : 2005-06) 9 24. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF GROUNDS RAISED IN ITS APPEAL IS FOUND TO BE JUSTIFIED A ND IS ACCEPTED. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE DEPARTMENT BY WAY OF ITS GROUND S OF APPEAL IS FOUND TO CARRY NO FORCE WHATSOEVER AND IS REJECTED AS SUCH. 25. ACCORDINGLY THE ORDER UNDER APPEAL IS CONFIRMED SO FAR AS REGARDS THE DELETION OF THE ADDITION OF `24 55 000 I S CONCERNED WHEREAS IT IS CANCELLED INSOFAR AS REGARDS THE CONFIRMAT ION OF THE ADDITION OF `2 65 000. 26. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED WHEREAS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED. 27. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 25.02.2011. SD/- SD/- (K.D. RANJAN) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED FEB. 25 2011. SKB COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-XIII NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT) NEW DELHI. AR/ITAT