TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 881
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rovide bogus capital to the beneficiaries against cash received from them, the addition made by the Ld. AO and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is unjustified and uncalled for, as the laptop impounded during the survey u/s. 133A conducted on 20.11.2007 at the business premises of Sh. SK Gupta contained complete details of intermediaries, beneficiaries, cash received and cheque issued etc. which are presumed to be correct u/s. 292C of the I.T. Act. 2(c) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by failing to appreciate the fact that the complete list of beneficiaries found in the seized records and available with the Department were filed during the course of assessment proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly observed that the list of beneficiaries did not exist. 2(d). That the Id. CIT (A) has ignored the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court and the Tribunals squarely on the issue even though the same were cited and form part of the written statements reproduced by the Id, 2(e). That the Id. CIT (A) has erred in ignoring the settled legal principle that tile same amount cannot be taxed doubly unless the loss or profit and the nature of the same changes. In the case of the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. DCIT vide Order dated 28.1.2015 passed in ITA No. 3477/Del/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) & Others. Therefore, he requested that the present appeal filed by the Assessee may be allowed in the same terms. 4. On the contrary, Shri Gaurav Dudeja, Sr. Departmental Representative relied upon the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant records, especially the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities and we are of the view that there is a force in the Statement made by the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee regarding the similar issue in dispute has been decided in favor of the assessee by the ITAT, 'E' Bench, New Delhi in the case of M/s Omni Farms Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. DCIT vide Order dated 28.1.2015 passed in ITA No. 3477/Del/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) & Others. We have also perused the assessment order, especially the Annexure-A in which there are 27 companies and assessee company name is at Serial No. 14 of the said Annexure-A. For the sake of convenience, the contents of AnnexureITA A attached by the AO alongwith his assessment order, which is reproduced as under S.No. Name of Company Unexplained depos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3478/Del/2013 (A.Y. 2008-09) is at Serial No. 18; M/s Katson Hotel and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Falcon Freight Pvt. Ltd.) vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3480Del/2013 is at Serial No. 12; M/s Beriwal Investment & Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3481/Del/2013 is at Serial No. 6; M/s Champ Finvest Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3482/Del/2013 is at Serial No. 8; M/s Cubic Commercial Resources Ltd. vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3483/Del/2013 is at Serial No. 10; M/s Vijay Conductors India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3484/Del/2013 is at Serial no. 25; M/s Vishrut Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3485/Del/2013 is at Serial No. 26 and M/s Namrata Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT who filed ITA No. 3621/Del/2013 is at Serial No. 15. We find that the issues involved in the aforesaid appeals are similar to that of the issue involved in the present appeal and same has been decided in favor of the assessee and the additions were deleted. For the sake of convenience, relevant paragraphs of the ITAT's order dated 28.1.2015 passed by 'E' Bench, New Delhi in the case of M/s Omni Farms Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 34....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee was found to have been using the bank accounts opened in different banks to route the entries through two to four accounts to vie the color of genuineness to these transactions." 13. Thus, the Assessing Officer himself has recorded the finding that the assessee company is one of the group concerns of S.K. Gupta group and Shri S.K. Gupta admitted that he had been providing accommodation entries to various persons through a large number of concerns effectively controlled by him. The Settlement Commission also has recorded the similar finding that Shri S.K. Gupta was providing entries to various beneficiaries by using various firms/companies. Admittedly, the companies under appeal before us are the part of companies which were utilized by Shri S.K. Gupta for providing accommodation entries. In paragraph 26, the Settlement Commission has recorded the finding "It is further observed that the paper books give complete details as to how and when cash was received from the mediators, the cash was deposited in the bank accounts of intermediatories and cheques were issued to the beneficiaries of almost the same amounts". Thus, after examining the facts, the Settlement Commissio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....articular assessment year. In this case, the Settlement Commission was seized of asst. yr. 2006-07. Whilst exercising its authority over the application, the Commission concededly exercised the vast plenitude of its power or jurisdiction. The petitioner had made a disclosure in its application - as it was duty-bound to. What is in controversy today is that the subsequent event of search and seizure operation conducted in the premises of M and the contention of the Revenue - have thrown light on material that had been suppressed from the Commission. If such is the case, it would be only logical that the Commission itself should be approached for a declaration that its order of 17th March, 2008 is a nullity. Allowing any other authority, even by way of a notice under s. 153C, would be to permit multiple jurisdictions which can result in chaos. After all non-disclosure or suppression of information in respect of what is required to be revealed to the concerned authorities is akin to fraud and if it has a material bearing on the outcome of the assessment, it would most certainly be misrepresentation." 15. Thus, Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has held that the order of the Set....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Revenue is taking action in the hands of the beneficiaries, if the addition is made in the case of conduit entities, it will dilute the case of the Department against the beneficiaries. The order of the Additional CIT under Section 144A is binding on the Assessing Officer which is evident from Section 144A which reads as under:- "144A. A Joint Commissioner may, on his own motion or on a reference being made to him by the Assessing Officer or on the application of an assessee, call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which an assessment is pending and, if he considers that, having regard to the nature of the case or the amount involved or for any other reason, it is necessary or expedient so to do, he may issue such directions as he thinks fit for the guidance of the Assessing Officer to enable him to complete the assessment and such directions shall be binding on the Assessing Officer : Provided that no directions which are prejudicial to the assessee shall be issued before an opportunity is given to the assessee to be heard. Explanation. - For the purposes of this section no direction as to the lines on which an investigation connected with the assessment....