9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3-14. The said assessment order is framed u/s 143(3) of the Act after thorough scrutiny and in the said assessment order, the same statement of Shri Maninder Singh Sahni has been extracted which has been made the basis for making additions. In the entire assessment order framed after thorough scrutiny, there is no whisper about the transaction between TMR Projects Pvt Ltd and the assessee relating to the share application money and the loan. Assessment of TMR Projects Pvt Ltd was completed by making addition of Rs. 15.07 lakhs being 1% of the commission earned on providing accommodation entries relating to sales. That addition was also deleted by this Tribunal [ 2021 (9) TMI 1471 - ITAT DELHI] wherein the Tribunal observed that addition is dehors of any incriminating material and the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [ 2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT] squarely apply. Since Rs. 2.10 crores has come from TMR Projects Pvt Ltd and since no addition has been made in the hands of the giver for want of incriminating material, the same transaction cannot be accepted as based upon any incriminating material in the hands of the taker , i.e the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of unexplained expenditure of Rs. 2,10,000/- u/s 69C of the Act by ignoring that no evidence of such expenses was found and the amounts were received from a group company, also been assessed by the same AO at the same time accepting sources of the said investment in its hands. Thus, the addition made on surmises and conjectures must be deleted. 5. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in Confirming the disallowance made for preliminary expenses of Rs. 80,861/- by ignoring the submissions and information placed on record. Thus, the addition made on surmises and conjectures must be deleted. The appellant craves the leave to add, substitute, modify, delete or amend all or any ground of appeal either before or at the time of hearing." 3. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the additions made by the Assessing Officer in the impugned assessment order are dehors of any incriminating material found at the time of search and, therefore, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 squarely apply. 4. Per contra, the ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cluded that the assessee could neither explain successfully the credit entry of Rs. 2 crores being share application money received from TMR Projects Pvt Ltd nor it could explain the credit of Rs. 10 lakhs from the same company. Having come to the conclusion that the assessee failed to discharge the onus cast upon it by provisions of section 68 of the Act, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 2.10 crores u/s 68 of the Act and made further addition of Rs. 2.10. lakhs being alleged commission on obtaining accommodation entry of Rs. 2.10 crores. 12. Additions were challenged before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success. 13. We have given thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee is that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [supra] squarely apply on the facts of the case. We have carefully gone through the assessment order. Except for the statement of Shri Maninder Singh Sahni, there is not even a whisper of any incriminating material found at the time of search. Statement of Shri Maninder Singh Sahni has been extracted by the Assessing Officer in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him j wherein the assessee company derived gross margin and after meeting the indirect expenses, the same was offered to tax. It is further reiterated that entire activity of trading was undertaken by the assessee company as per direction of Mr. Mukesh Kumar with a view to earn income. The entire activity of purchases and sales including generation of sales invoice and procurement of purchase bills was performed by him. All the parties wherefrom/ to purchases and sales were made as mentioned above belonged to him. It is also clarified that he use to collect receipts from sales and got payments made against purchase through bank accounts and none of the transactions was ever undertaken except through normal banking channel. With regard to delivery of goods purchased and transportation used, it is again reiterated that all such transaction were carried out at the behest of Mr. Mukesh Kumar resulting into income to the assessee company. Presuming without admitting, in case our goodself has any concern regarding genuineness of such transactions as conducted by Mr. Mukesh Kumar, then also no negative inference should be taken against the assessee company since the income if any, as g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in the body of the assessment order or in the body of the order of the first appellate authority. 15. We have the benefit of the assessment order of TMR Projects Pvt Ltd for Assessment Year 2013-14. The said assessment order is framed u/s 143(3) of the Act after thorough scrutiny and in the said assessment order, the same statement of Shri Maninder Singh Sahni has been extracted which has been made the basis for making additions. In the entire assessment order framed after thorough scrutiny, there is no whisper about the transaction of Rs. 2.10 crores between TMR Projects Pvt Ltd and the assessee relating to the share application money and the loan. 16. Assessment of TMR Projects Pvt Ltd was completed by making addition of Rs. 15.07 lakhs being 1% of the commission earned on providing accommodation entries relating to sales. That addition was also deleted by this Tribunal in ITA No. 5771/DEL/2018 vide order dated 15.09.2021 wherein the Tribunal observed that addition is dehors of any incriminating material and the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [supra] squarely apply. 17. Since Rs. 2.10 crores has come from TMR Projects Pvt Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt with respect to the AY under consideration 2011-12 admittedly stood completed. Since no assessment was pending for the relevant AY 2011-12 on the date of search and no incriminating material was found during the course of search, the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of this Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287/248 Taxman 384/395 ITR 526/295 CTR 466 (Delhi)...." 21. Again, in the case of Agson Global (P) Ltd 134 taxmann.com, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as under: "11. Therefore, having regard to the aforesaid observations made in Kabul Chawla case (supra) the only aspect that the Tribunal had to examine was whether the statement made by Mr Arpesh Garg, Managing Director of the assessee under section 132(4) of the Act and the photocopies of the documents found during the search and seizure action constituted incriminating material. 11.1 The Tribunal, in our view, has correctly analysed the statement of Mr Arpesh Garg. The statement does not allude to the fact that the assessee had introduced ''unaccounted money " in the form of share capital/share premium through investor .e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
