9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - - Dated:- 31-10-2012 - SHRI U.B.S.BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J.S.REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant: Sh. Ris Gill, CIT Dr For the Respondent: Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. 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 assessee company belongs to the Thapar Group of cases. Action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried on in the case of Sh. B.K.Dhingra, Smt. Poonam Dhingra M/s Madhusudan Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. on 20.10.2008. On the basis of documents found during the course of search, proceedings were ini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e hearing of the appeal. 4. The assessee filed the following cross-objections:- (1) That in view of the facts circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) has erred in not holding that the notice issued U/s 153C and the assessment order passed U/s 153C/143(3) are illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction and barred by time limitation. (2) That the documents found during search proceedings, as referred to in the satisfaction note, do not belong to assessee as the same were part of working papers of the C.A Sh. B.K.Dhingra in whose office the search was conducted. Hence, the notice issued U/s 153C, based on said documents, is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. (3) That admittedly, as recorded in the satisfa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceedings 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 Nos. 31-36/Del./2011 order dated 13.06.2012. Both parties agree that the finding of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Blue Luxury Index Pvt. Ltd, (supra) cover the issue on hand. 6. The Tribunal at para 6 to para 8 of that order in ITA No.-5495- 5500/Del./2011, its held as follows:- 6. We have heard the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngly, 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 books of accounts. Thus, source of the expenditure incurred in purchases is obviously explained. In the light of view taken in the their aforesaid decision by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court ,especially when the Revenue did not place any material before us, controverting the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
