TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 1486
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Arvind Sonde, brought to our notice the decision of the Tribunal dated 29/05/2015 (ITA No.536/Mum/2012) by explaining that the addition on the basis of which penalty was levied has been deleted, therefore, the penalty will not survive. This factual matrix was not controverted by the ld. DR. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above, we are reproducing hereunder the relevant portion from order of the Tribunal dated 29/05/2015 for ready reference and analysis:- "6. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee, wherein the assessee is challenging the disallowance of professional fee paid to S.K. Gupta group of compani....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... he had rendered services to M/s Reliance Industries ltd. He has further submitted that he did not refer the name of the assessee herein as one of the beneficiary of the accommodation bills in his statement taken during December, 2006. Accordingly the Ld A.R submitted that the assessing officer was not justified in rejecting the affidavit as well as subsequent statement given by Shri S.K. Gupta. The ld A.R further submitted that the assessee has furnished the details of professional work performed by Shri S.K. Gupta and the bills given by him for the services rendered. Accordingly he submitted that the Ld CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the disallowance of professional charges paid to Shri S.K.Gupta. He further submitted that the Del....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Gupta and his group of companies, bills raised by them etc. We notice that the tax authorities have rejected the same without considering them at all, which action, in our view, is not justified. 10. We further notice that the assessing officer has completely relied upon the report given by the Investigation authorities of New Delhi. The fact remains that the AO himself has stated that the department has made protective assessment in the hands of Shri S.K.Gupta and his group of companies. The AO has not made any reference to any of the reasoning given in those assessment orders, particularly how the retraction of earlier statement was addressed by the concerned assessing officer. Further, we notice that the assessing officer did not cond....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fer fifty lakhs of rupees as income. However, before the AO, the assessee claimed the payment of professional fee to be genuine, which was not accepted by the assessing officer and accordingly the entire professional charges of Rupees one crore was disallowed. Before Ld CIT(A) raised following contentions with regard to the legality of the addition:- "(a) That the statement of Shri S.K.Gupta recorded on 13.12.2006 and 27.12.2006 were not provided to the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings and were given to the appellant only as per the directions of the Ld CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings after repeated requests were made in writing. As regards other statements only extracts were provided that too on th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed appeal before the Tribunal challenging the partial relief granted by the assessee, but the same was dismissed. 12. The facts prevailing in the instant case, in essence, is identical with the case of M/s Link Engineers Pvt Ltd (referred supra). In the paper book filed before us, the assessee has furnished detailed list of professional services availed from Shri S.K. Gupta group of companies. In the instant case also, the assessing officer has merely placed reliance on the original statements given by Shri S.K. Gupta without considering the retracted statement/affidavit. Since M/s Link Engineers Pvt ltd had surrendered Rs. 50.00 lakhs, the Ld CIT(A) has partially confirmed the addition. Otherwise, the Ld CIT(A) seems to have come to....