9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the merits are decided in the assessee’s favour and hence he would not press the same. Hence, in view of our decision on merits, the cross-objections are dismissed as not pressed - In the result, appeals of the revenue as well as cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed. - C.O. Nos.-127-132/Del/2012 (In I.T.A .Nos.-1048-1053/Del./2012 - - - Dated:- 2-11-2012 - SHRI U.B.S.BEDI, AND SHRI J.S.REDDY, JJ. Appellant by: Sh. Ris Gill, Sr. Dr. Respondent by: Sh. Kapil Goel. ORDER PER BENCH All these appeals by the revenue are directed against the common order of the Ld. CIT(A)-II, Delhi dated 21.10.2008 passed for AYs 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09. Briefs facts of the case:- 2. The as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med by the assessee. (5) That the Commissisoner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in holding that the statements of various persons without being confronted to the assessee had no evidentiary value and they did not have any connection with the assessee. (6) (a) The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. (b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. Similar grounds of appeal were taken for the AYs 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 2008-09. 4. The assessee filed the following similar cross-objections for all the AYs:- (1) That in view of the facts circumstances of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stances of the case and the provisions of the law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in not considering the fact that the assessment proceeding for the year under appeal was not pending on the date of the recording of satisfaction u/s 153C of the Act and accordingly the same did not abate for the purpose of initiation of proceedings u/s 153C and as such the assessment being bad in law deserves to be quashed. (7) That the respondent reserves the right to add/amend/alter the grounds of cross objection. 5. After hearing both parties, we find that similar issues, on the same set of facts has come up before the A Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT, Central Circle-21 vs M/s Blue Luxury Index Pvt. Ltd. in ITA Nos.-5495-5500/Del./2011 with CO N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this reason that the ITAT observed as under: "As the expenditure was accounted in the regular books, the source is obviously explained. The provisions of section 69C are not applicable as there was no unaccounted expenditure." [Emphasis supplied]" 6.1 Hon ble High Court, accordingly, held that section 69C refers to the source of the expenditure and not to the expenditure itself. Consequently, the AO was clearly wrong in treating the said expenditure as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the said Act and the lower appellate authorities were right in their conclusions in deleting the said addition, Hon ble Court concluded. 6.2 In the instant case before us, indisputably, the purchases and sales are accounted for in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 20.10.2012. Hence, on merits the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. 8. As the issue on merits is decided in favour of the assessee by following the Co-ordinate Bench decisions, we do not deal with the issue arising out of the fact of amalgamation. 9. Consistent with the view taken in the decision, we uphold the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismiss the appeals of the revenue. 10. Coming to the cross-objections, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that they filed the same in support of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). On legal issues, it was submitted that the grounds would become academic if the merits are decided in the assessee s favour and hence he would not press the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
