2012 (2) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate, for the respondent. JUDGEMENT M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The revenue has preferred the instant appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, 'the Act') against the order dated 8.12.2010 (A-3) passed by the Chandigarh Bench 'B' of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for brevity, 'the Tribunal), dismissing the appeal of the revenue-appellant and upholding the order dated 15.4.2008 (A-2) passed by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted the assessee-respondent to lead additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (for brevity, 'the Rules'). Copies of the additional evidence furnished by the assessee-respondent were also sent to the Assessing Officer for comments and after consideration of the report submitted by him the Commissioner deleted the addition by holding that the assessee-respondent has proved the genuineness of the transactions, identity, capacity and creditworthiness of the creditor, vide order dated 15.4.2008 (A-2). 4. Feeling dis-satisfied with the order dated 15.4.2008 (A-2) passed by the Commissioner, the revenue-appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal. On 8.12.2010, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal upholding the order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e company, and the same was returned by the assessee company to Shri Reetinder Sidhu after the demise of his mother Smt. Pritpal Kaur. The said evidence is furnished at page 26 of the paper book. The Ld. DR for the Revenue has failed to controvert the aforesaid evidence filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) and before us. In the absence of any contrary findings, we uphold the order of CIT(A) in holding that once the assessee has established the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions, there is no merit in the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act. Upholding the order of CIT(A), we dismiss the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue." 5. Having heard learned counsel for the revenue-appellant we are of the consid....