ACIT, New Delhi v. Sh. Brij Lal Goyal, Delhi

ITSSA 105/DEL/2008 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 10520116 RSA 2008
Assessee PAN AAEPG8687R
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITSSA 105/DEL/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 10 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, New Delhi
Respondent Sh. Brij Lal Goyal, Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 27-04-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 27-04-2010
Next Hearing Date 27-04-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 17-11-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P.TOLANI JM AND SHRI K.G.BANSAL AM IT(SS) A NO.105/DEL/2008 BLOCK PERIOD : 1.4.1996 TO 7.5.2002 ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-5 NEW DELHI. VS. SHRI BRIJ LAL GOYAL PROP. M/S GOYAL ENTERPRISES INC. D-27 C.C.COLONY DELHI. PAN NO.AAEPG8687R. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHOK PANDEY CIT-DR. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J.P.GOEL CA. ORDER PER R.P.TOLANI JM : THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) XXVIII NEW DELHI DATED 28.08.2008 FOR THE BLOCK AS SESSMENT PERIOD FROM 1.4.1996 TO 7.5.2002. 2. FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS ARE RAISED:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.22 99 174/- MADE BY THE A.O. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 67 471/- MADE BY THE A.O. AS UNDISCLOSED INCOM E. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.40 77 564/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF PHOTOCOPIES OF CHEQUES FOUND AND SEIZED FROM THE HYDERABAD OFFICE. IT(SS)A NO.105/DEL/2008 2 3. LD. D.R. RELIED ON ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT THE C IT(A) CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH HAS BEE N CONSIDERED BY HIM AND THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DELETED IN JUST AND PRO PER MANNER. APROPOS GROUND NO.2 ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS ASSESSMENT OR DER HAS ADDED THE SAME BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- PAGE 130 OF ANNEXURE A/GE/13 GIVES THE ACCOUNTS OF SEVERAL ENTRIES. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN ALL THE ENTRIES. THOUGH THE OTHER ENTRIES ARE REFLECTING IN HIS BOOK S OF ACCOUNTS ONE ENTRY OF RS.22 99 174/- IS NOT REFLECTED IN ANY OF HIS ACCOUNT. SINCE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO PROVIDE ANY EXPLANATION/EVIDENCE FOR THE SAME HENCE THE AMOUNT OF RS.22 99 174/- IS TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. AS PER ASSESSEES EXPLANATION THAT THIS PAPER BELONGS TO G OEL ENTP. INC. THE ADDITION IS MADE IN THE HANDS OF SH. BRIJ LAL GOEL. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT WHEN ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSEL F HAS MADE AN OBSERVATION THAT THE PAPER ABOUT DEPB PERTAINS TO T HE TRANSACTION BELONGED TO SRI SUNIL GOYAL SON OF THE ASSESSEE W HICH IS REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT STILL THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE. THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- '2.1.........IN THE PRESENT CASE THE APPELLANT HAS SUCCESSFULLY PROVED THAT THESE FIVE 'ENTRIES BELONG TO HIS SON AND THIS STAND HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE' S SON MR. SUNIL GOYAL. THE FIVE ENTRIES DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE APPELLANT. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THERE W AS NO WARRANT TO INCLUDE THE AMOUNT OF RS. 22 99 174/- IN THE INCOME OF APPELLANT AS THIS DEPB WAS NEVER PURCHASED FROM VIRCHOW LABORATO RIES LIMITED AS PER ITS LETTER DATED 17.4.04 EITHER BY THE APPEL LANT OR BY ANY IT(SS)A NO.105/DEL/2008 3 MEMBER OF THE FAMILY AND HENCE THE OWNERSHIP TO DEP B VESTS WITH VIRCHOW LABORATORIES LTD. IT IS ACCORDINGLY PRAYED THAT NECESSARY DIRECTIONS MAY BE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER T O DELETE THIS AMOUNT FROM THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT.' 5. APROPOS GROUND NO.3 IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE S AME ALSO PERTAINS TO DEPB TRANSACTIONS WHICH PERTAIN TO HIS SON. BE SIDES THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED A LETTER FROM THE OTHER PARTY THAT THE TRA NSACTIONS NEVER TOOK PLACE. THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVI NG AS UNDER:- '2.2 GROUND NO.3(II) CHALLENGES THE ADDITION OF RS. 1 67 471/-. IT IS ARGUED THAT THE ADDITION MAY BE DELETED AS NECESSAR Y EVIDENCE/CONFIRMATION FROM THE AGENT FOR NOT SELLIN G THE DEPB LICENSE TO THE APPELLANT WAS FILED BEFORE THE ASSES SING OFFICER. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING LETTER DATED 17.4. 2004 OF SRI JAYALAKSHMI SPINNING MILLS LTD. WAS FILED BEFORE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER. THE SAID LETTER HAS BEEN ADDRESSED TO MR. ANIL GOYAL WHO LOOKS AFTER THE WORK OF THE APPELLANT AT HYDERABAD. THE LETTER WAS ADDRESSED TO MR. ANL GOYAL AS REPRESENTING M/S GOYA L ENTERPRISES WHOSE PROPRIETOR IS THE APPELLANT. HENCE FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES THE LETTER IS RELEVANT FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI BRIJ LAL GOYAL WHO IS PROPRIETOR OF GOYAL ENTERPRISES. IN VIEW OF THE LE TTER FROM SRI JAYALAKSHMI SPINNING MILLS LTD. CLEARLY STATIJNG T HAT THE SAID DEPB VALUED AT RS.1 67 471 HAS NOT BEEN SOLD TO APPELLAN T TEHRE WAS NO REASLON TO DRAW ANY PRESUMPTION THAT THIS AMOUNT RE PRESENT UNRECORDED PURCHASE MADE BY THE APPELLANT. HENCE I T IS PRAYED THAT NECESSARY DIRECTIONS MAY BE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THIS ADDITION FROM THE INCOME ASSESSED UNDER SECTIO N 158 BC.' IT(SS)A NO.105/DEL/2008 4 7. APROPOSE GROUND NO.4 IT WAS CONTENDED THAT SOME PHOTOCOPIES OF BLANK CHEQUES WERE FOUND FROM THE ASSESSEE'S PREMIS ES WHICH WERE GIVEN BY THE PARTIES IN ADVANCE TO SECURE DEPB TRANSFERS. ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS HAS HIMSELF FOUND THAT 8 OUT OF 9 SUCH CHEQUES WERE NEVER ENCASHED AND ABOUT ONE OTHER CHEQUE ALSO NO TRANSACTION WAS FOUND. THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY FOLLOWIN G OBSERVATIONS:- '4.2 SO FAR AS THE ADDITION OF RS.40 77 564/- IS CO NCERNED IT IS NOTICED THAT IT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ON ACCOUNT OF THE FOLLOWING BLANK CHEQUES:- S.NO. CH. NO. AMOUNT BANK 1. 678810 52664 VIJAY BANK 2. 277937 500000 SBBJ 3. 422653 400000 -DO- 4. 422652 400000 -DO- 5. 422651 375000 -DO- 6. 003108 450000 VASAVI COOP URBAN BANK LTD. 7. 277936 500000 SBBJ 8. NOT AVAILABLE 400000 -DO- 9. 568185 1000000 UCO BANK 4077564 NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECOR D TO SHOW THAT THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN THESE CHEQUES WAS INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE APPELLANT HAD FURNISHED LETTERS DATED 15.03.2005 & 25.08.2005 FROM SRI SAI METALS SECUNDERABAD. THESE LETTERS INDICATE THAT T HE SAID CONCERN HAD CONFIRMED THAT THE CHEQUES FOR RS. 30 25 000/- HAD NOT BEEN ENCASHED FROM THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS. THIS FACT REMAIN S UN- CONTROVERTED. THE REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER D ATED 14.07.2008 ALSO CONFIRMS THAT CHEQUES NOS. 277936 277937 422 651 TO 422653 IT(SS)A NO.105/DEL/2008 5 HAD NOT BEEN PRESENTED BEFORE STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR FOR PAYMENT. NO CONFIRMATION FROM VASAVI COOP BANK LTD. HAS BEEN RECEIVED EVEN AFTER A GAP OF ABOUT THREE YEARS APP ARENTLY BECAUSE IT HAS CLOSED DOWN. ADDITION OF RS. 4 00 000/- HAS BEEN MADE ON THE BASIS OF A CHEQUE WHOSE NUMBER WAS NOT AVAILABLE. H ENCE THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THIS ADDITION ALSO. IN VIEW OF THE CO NFIRMATION FROM M/S. SRI SAI METALS (DATED 15.03.2005) AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER'S REPORT DATED 14.07.2008 THE ADDITION OF RS.30 25 000/- AP PEARS TO BE UNJUSTIFIED AND IS ACCORDINGLY DELETED. IT WAS PLEADED THAT SINCE THE CIT(A) HAS DELETED TH E ADDITIONS AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ENTIRE EVIDENCE AND CONSIDERING THE ASS ESSING OFFICERS REMAND REPORT WHICH IN TURN IS BASED ON THE INQUIR IES CONDUCTED BY HIM THE RELIEF GIVEN IS ON PROPER CONSIDERATION AND JUS TIFIED. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. APROPOS GROUND NO.2 AND 3 THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF HAS ADMITTED THAT THESE TRANSACTION I.E DEPB TRANSACTIO NS BELONGED TO ASSESSEES SON AND ARE DULY REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. APROPOS ONE TRANSACTION CONFIRMATION OF THE PARTY HAS BEEN FILED TO THE EFFECT THAT NO SUCH TRANSACTION MATERIALIZED. IN VIEW THEREOF WE SEE NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF THESE TWO GROUNDS. 9. APROPOS GROUND NO.4 ALSO A REMAND REPORT WAS CA LLED FOR FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF PHOTOCOPIES OF BLAN K CHEQUES. THE CIT(A) IT(SS)A NO.105/DEL/2008 6 HAS CONSIDERED ALL THE FACTS AND BASED ON CONFIRMAT IONS INQUIRIES AND EVIDENCE DELETED THE ADDITION. WE SEE NO INFIRMITY IN HIS ORDER IN THIS REGARD ALSO. 10. IN THE RESULT REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH APRIL 2010. SD/- SD/- (K.G.BANSAL) (R.P.TOLANI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 27.04.2010. VSK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT-REVENUE 2. RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ITAT NEW DELHI DEPUTY REGISTRAR IT(SS)A NO.105/DEL/2008 7