Sakshi Granite Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax

Department by : Sh. BRR KUMAR, Sr. D.R. Assessee by : None

Date of Hearing : 03-02-2015 Date of Order : 09-02-2015 ORDER

PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 17/9/2010 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-X, New Delhi on the following grounds:-

"1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on merits in admitting additional evidences in contravention to Rule 46A of the I.T. Act, 1961.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on merits in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,35,000/-

1 ITA NO. 5489/Del/2010

made by AO as income from undisclosed sources as per section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3. The appellant craves to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal."

2. The facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both parties, therefore, no need to repeat the same for the sake of convenience. The AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 09.12.2008 and made the various additions.

3. Against the order of the AO dated 09/12/2008 assessee filed an appeal before the Id. First Appellate Authority who vide impugned order dated 17/8/2010 partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.

4. Now the Revenue is aggrieved against the impugned order and filed the present appeal before the Tribunal.

5. Notice was sent to the assessee on the address given by it, however, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment is filed. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served to adjourn the case again and again. Therefore, we are deciding the Appeal, exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records available on record.

6. However, assessee has filed a Paper Book containing pages 1 to 80 having the facts of the case, collaboration agreement with the

2 ITA NO. 5489/Del/2010

builder; sale agreement; DVO's Report; assessee's submissions; assessment order; remand report; CIT's order; Sr. DR letter and additional ground of appeal.

7. At the time of hearing Ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal.

8. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused and considered the relevant record available with us, specially the impugned order passed by the Revenue Authorities; brief narration filed by the assessee alongwith the Paper Book. We find that Ld. First Appellate Authority has elaborately discussed the issues in dispute by considering the submissions of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee and adjudicated the issue in dispute vide para 5 at Page 8 to 9 of the impugned order as under:-

"5. The third ground of appeal pertains to addition of unsecured loans as income. The assessee had not submitted all the relevant documents during assessment proceedings to verify the unsecured loan of Rs. 8,35,000/- frome one of the directors. It has been stated that the assessee's office was sealed by MCD because of which he could not submit all the relevant documents. It is seen that the assessee has submitted them now. A set of these documents were sent to AO for his comment. After verifying the same, the AO has accepted the assessee's plea in his Remand Report reproduced above. Hence, the addition of Rs. 8,35,000/- is deleted, keeping in view the report of the AO who has verified the documents. Held accordingly."

3 ITA NO. 5489/Del/2010

9. With regard to Ground No. 1 regarding admitting of additional

evidences in contravention to Rule 46A of the I.T. Act, 1961 is

concerned, we are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A) has observed in his

order that after considering the submissions of the assessee, the

two Remand Reports and the assessment order, the ground of

appeal were decided. We find that Ld. AO has filed to Remand

Reports viz. dated 13.1.2010 and 17.5.2010 which has been

considered by the Ld. CIT(A) by reproducing the same at pages 5 to

7 of his impugned order. The same are not reproduced here for the

sake of brevity. In view of the above, we are of the view that no

interference is called for in the well reasoned order passed by the

Ld. CIT(A) on the issue of admission of additional evidences, hence,

we uphold the same.

9.1 With regard to Ground No. 2 regarding deleting the addition of

Rs. 8,35,000/- made by AO as income from undisclosed sources as

per section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is concerned, we are of

the view that the Ld. CIT(A) has observed the assessee had not

submitted all the relevant documents during assessment

proceedings to verify the unsecured loan of Rs. 8,35,000/- from one

of the directors. Ld. CIT(A) further observed that it has been stated

that the assessee's office was sealed by MCD because of which he

could not submit all the relevant documents. Ld. CIT(A) further

observed that the assessee has submitted the relevant

4 ITA NO. 5489/Del/2010

document before him now. A set of these documents were sent to

AO for his comment, by the Ld. CIT(A) and after verifying the same,

the AO has accepted the assessee's plea in his Remand Report.

We are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A), rightly deleted the addition

of Rs. 8,35,000/-, keeping in view the report of the AO who has

verified the documents. Therefore, no interference is called for in

the well reasoned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue,

hence, we uphold the same.

10. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 09/02/2015.

Sd/- Sd/-

[J.S. REDDY] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Date 09/02/2015 "SRBHATNAGAR" Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order,

Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Benches

5