TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 724
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Survey action u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was undertaken in the business premises of the assessee on 9-8-2007 on the basis of statement given by one Mr. K.K. Gupta on 25-7-2007 alleging that the said Mr. Gupta was merely providing bills and entries and that he had been charging commission for his services @ 0.25% of the aggregate transactions entered into by the group with any party. It was noticed that the assessee had entered into transactions worth Rs. 4,62,59,347/- and sold goods worth Rs. 4,73,36,102/- to the entities controlled by the said Mr. K.K. Gupta. Accordingly notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 17-10-2007 and served on the same date. In response to the notice u/s 148, the assessee filed return declaring total income at Rs. 45,69,624/- which in fact the income assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dtd. 26-2-2006. However, the assessment was completed at an income of Rs. 53,89,680/- including the addition on account of commission of Rs. 2,51,698/- vide order dtd. 31-12-2008 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sales as disclosed by the assessee and books of accounts have not been rejected, on this account also the addition made by the A.O. and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is not sustainable and the same be deleted. 10. On the other hand, the ld. D.R. supports the order of the A.O. and the ld. CIT(A). 11. We have carefully considered the submissions of rival parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the facts are not in dispute inasmuch as it is also not in dispute that the A.O. has accepted the purchases and sales as disclosed by the assessee and has not rejected the books of accounts as maintained by the assessee. While making the addition of undisclosed commission of Rs. 2,51,698/-, the A.O. has relied upon the statement of Mr. K.K. Gupta recorded on oath by the DDIT (Inv.) on 25-7-2007 u/s 131 of the Act. However, during the course of assessment proceedings it was stated by the assessee that at the time of statement recorded by the DDIT (Inv.) it was inter alia stated by the assessee that unless all facts with respect to the statement made by Mr. Gupta were given, proper cross examination could not be carried out and hence right to cross examination was r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to 13 of this order, delete the addition of Rs. 2,00,229/- sustained by the ld. CIT(A). The grounds taken by the assessee are, therefore, allowed. 20. Ground No. 3 & 4 are against the sustenance of disallowance of deduction u/s 10B of the Act. 21. At the time of hearing the ld. counsel for the assessee very fairly submits that it does not arise as the purchases are not for the unit eligible for deduction u/s 10B of the Act which was not objected to by the ld. D.R. 22. That being so and in the absence of any supporting material placed on record by the ld. counsel for the assessee, the grounds taken by the assessee are, therefore, rejected. ITA No. 4038/Mum/2011 (By assessee for A.Y. 2006-07) 23. Ground No. 1 is against the validity of the assessment u/s 147/148 of the Act. 24. At the time of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee submits that he does not want to press the above ground which was not objected to by the ld. D.R. 25. That being so and in the absence of any supporting material placed on record by the ld. counsel for the assessee, the ground taken by the assessee is, therefore, rejected being not pressed. 26. Ground No. 2(a), 2(b) and 2(c) are a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ine in view of the following evidences (page 7 & 8 of Assessing Officer's order):- "(a) The factual existence of the said machinery as found under a due diligence conducted by an independent body "Earnest & Young" an accounting firm of high repute with far more credibility than Mr. Gupta. (b) The authenticated location, testing report and installation report filed before your kind self and already on record as relating to the said machinery. (c) Some of the said machinery is also part of the demerger arrangement under the order of the Honourable Mumbai High Court, and hence is part of the High Court records. This fact has more value than mere general statements made by the said Mr. Gupta. (d) The above is in addition to and without prejudice to the submissions already made and on record. (e) The Annexure hereto relating to the claim of depreciation reinforces what is already on record and explained before you kind self. The increase in output on account of the purchases would not have been possible without the additional machinery. The said Annexure is self explanatory." It was further stated that necessary documents related to the pu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also submitted to the Income Tax Survey Team along with bills and vouchers related thereto. The relevant Plant & Machinery were existing in the premises of the appellant and no discrepancies were pointed out. The aforesaid fixed assets were accepted at Book value by independent Chartered Accountant Firms M/s. Earnest & Young and also by Haribhakti & Co. The appellant as well as the demerged company M/s. Intelnet BPO Services Limited made all necessary and relevant disclosure including that of the latest financial position and complied with the requirement stipulated in law in Company Petition No. 405 of 2006 connected with Company Application No.542 of 2006. The appellant had also given necessary undertakings before the Honorable Bombay High Court. The Regional Director has filed affidavit and relied upon the report of the Registrar of Companies after examining the scheme and relying upon the report, the Regional Director has certified that the demerger scheme was not prejudicial to the interest of the shareholders, creditors and public interest. The Official Liquidator filed a report before the Honorable Bombay High Court and relied upon the evidence of the C.A.s duly pointed out ....