2009-VIL-333-ITAT-DEL

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal DELHI

ITA No. 1788/Del/2009

Date: 17.07.2009

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 17 (4) , NEW DELHI.

Vs

M/s VISHAL HOLDING & CAPITAL (P) LTD.,

For the Appellant: Smt. Pratima Kaushik Sr. DR
For the Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar CA

BENCH

SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA: VICE PRESIDENT; AND SRHI D.R. SINGH: JUDICIAL MEMBER

JUDGMENT

2. The only ground raised by the revenue reads as under:

“On the facts & in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 49,55,300/- by holding that the assessee had discharged its onus especially when the genuineness of transaction, identity and creditworthiness of the parties was not established.”

3. The learned DR strongly supported the findings in the assessment order.

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee strongly relied upon the discussions made in the order of CIT(A). He pointed out that the assessee had produced copies of bills and contract notes issued by M/s MKM Finsec Pvt. Ltd. in respect of purchase and sale of shares. All payments were received through account payee cheques/ demand drafts, duly credited in the bank account and recorded in the regular books of account. The Assessing Officer has not verified the correctness of these details and simply went by certain information, which he claimed to have received from Investigation Wing and such information or findings of the Investigation Wing were not put to the assessee, violating the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel pointed out that it is for these reasons that the learned CIT(A) has correctly deleted the addition.

5. We have considered rival contentions and gone through the records. In our view the order of the CIT(A) does not require any interference. First of all the assessee has produced all details in respect of its transactions. Copies of the contract notes and bills, that were issued to it, were all made available. The Assessing Officer has not verified these details and in respect of the material, which has been relied upon by him, he has not provided any findings of the investigation to the assessee. Therefore, in these circumstances, the addition made by the Assessing Officer cannot be said to be on the basis of some evidence that was put to the assessee in the course of assessment proceedings. The learned CIT(A) has correctly deleted the addition and we decline to interfere. Accordingly, order of CIT(A) on the issue in question is upheld.

6. In the result, revenue ‘s appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in open court on 17th July 2009.

 

DISCLAIMER: Though all efforts have been made to reproduce the order accurately and correctly however the access, usage and circulation is subject to the condition that VATinfoline Multimedia is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake/error/omissions.