TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 218
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: - "A.Y. 2007-08 GROUNDS OF APPEAL 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in holding that the AO has erred in making addition of Rs. 22,00,000 /to the returned income in terms of section 68 of the Act not being satisfied with the genuineness of credit. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition of Rs.22,00,000/- holding that the appellant had discharged initial onus to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction and that the AO had not faulted the confirmations filed before him, the entire addition was merely based on suspicion regarding g BMPL which does not stand. 3. Whether on the facts and in the. circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition of Rs.22,00,000/- without appreciating that specific information was received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai stating that as per specific information received from the CBI, ACB, Mumbai, the assessee was involved in entering into bogus transaction with M/s. Basant Marketing Private Limited? ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rding Accommodation Bills/Accommodation entry. A note (in RC. BA 1/2010//A0006), running into 7 pages, outline the modus operandi of the group in providing the accommodation entries. This note also gives a list of companies/entities engaged in the accommodation entries. The present assessee's name appears at Sr. No. 8 as under: 8 Indian Galvanics Cyrium Foils Ltd. Director Prabhakar Sharma A L Saini PAN AADPS7328G Jitendra Singh 4. The A.O. has based the re-assessment order u/s. 147/143(3) on the basis of this report. The entire copy of the report was made available to the Ld. CIT(A). This report is now also submitted to the C Bench during the hearing on 17/03/2022. 5. It is, however, surprising to note that the Ld.CIT(A) has not at all considered this report, which is vital document, while deciding the appeal in favour of the assessee. The appeal has been decided on other extraneous issues without considering the contents of this vital piece of information and hence it is opined that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal. PRAYER: In view of the above facts, it is prayed that the impugned order(s) of the Ld.CIT(A) for all ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the CBI nor the Chartered Accountant hired by CBI did carry out any independent inquiry with third parties to ascertain the truth and fairness of the documents scrutinised. The report of the CA was never confronted to Mr Arun Kumar Dalmia or Mr Harsh Dalmia or for that matter to any of the companies of the group to which the documents pertained to. 2.3 In continuation to the letter dated 05.03.2010, the Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, had sent another letter to the Investigation Directorate of the department, dated 21.12.2010 enclosing therewith the Chartered Accountants' Report and requested the Directorate to take necessary action at their end. 2.3.1 On receipt of the letter dated 21.12.2010, to the best of the promoters knowledge, the Investigation Directorate did carry out enquiries with selected parties who had responded to their notices and submitted all the relevant details for their verification. They did not pursue further in the matter at their end. The Investigation Directorate did not feel it necessary to take any action on the observation of the Chartered Accountant contained in the Report submitted to the CBI. However, after a lapse of one ye....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ngs, on that account the AO proceeded to hold the credit as non-genuine and added it to the income of the respondent assessee herein in terms of section 68 of the Act. 2.5 M/s BMPL had filed an appeal before the CIT(A)-20, Kolkata, who based on elaborate submissions made before him, vide his order under Appeal No. 22/CIT (A)20/CC-2(2)/2009-10 dated 30th January 2015 reversed the finding of the AO. He categorically held that there is no material on record to hold that said company was involved in providing accommodation entry. Further, there is no material on record hold that the said company was fake and it did not actually exist. A copy of the said order is placed at Pages 33 to 58 of the Paper Book for AY 2007-08 and was also filed with Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai in support of the respondent assessee's claim. 3. The aforesaid facts of the case are borne out from the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) in the case of the respondent Assessee for the Assessment Year 2007-08. The entire facts of the case in respect of the CBI enquiry and the reopening thereafter were placed before the Ld. CIT(A). 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering all the facts and orders in the case of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the CBI report as well as one of the Directors of the Respondent Assessee, vide order No. CIT(A)-8/IT-753/14-15 dated 29.09.2016. The said appeal was also on the issue of Loan from BMPL and the issue was decided in favour of Harsh Dalmia. Further in that case, Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai had dismissed the appeal filed by Revenue and confirmed the decision of Ld. CIT(A), Mumbai in ITA No.7459/Mum/2016 dated 17.10.2017. The copy of the said order is enclosed at Page Nos. 71 to 78 of the Paper Book for AY 2007-08. 4. Further the Ld. CIT(A) was in the knowledge of the report of the CBI, ACB and that the same has been considered by him as is evident from Para No.3.1.2 and 3.1.4 at pages 9 and 10 of the Ld.CIT(A)'s order wherein while dismissing the Assessee's Legal Ground in respect of the reopening under section 147 of the Act the Ld. CIT(A) mentions the said CBI report. 5. It is further submitted that similar additions in respect of the loan of BMPL on the basis of the CBI report was made in the following cases, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) had granted relief and the Hon'ble ITAT had dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. (i) ITO Vs. Shri Harsh Dalmia....