2023 (8) TMI 1704

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....id 05 Cross Objections relating to assessment years 2012-13 to 2014-15 and 2016-17 and 2015-16 respectively. Since the issues involved in all the 03 Revenue appeals are common and identical, except the difference in figure of addition made on protective basis, hence, all the 03 appeals of Revenue alongwith Assessee's 05 Cross Objections were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience, by only dealing with Revenue's Appeal No. 8410/Del/2019 (AY 2012-13) and the decision thereof will apply mutatis mutandis to other Revenue's ITA Nos. 8411 to 8412/Del/2019 (AYrs. 2013-14 & 2014-15). 2. The grounds raised in Revenue's appeal No. 8410/Del/2019 (AY 2012-13) are reproduced as under:- 1. On....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ies and assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 12,64,44,162/- as against the returned income of Rs. 85,626/- vide order dated 17.12.2018 passed u/s. 153C r.w.s. 153A/143(3) of the Act. Against the assessment order dated 17.12.2018, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide his impugned order dated 20.8.2019 has partly allowed the appeal by observing that the commission income earned on providing accommodation entries through the assessee company have already been assessed by the Assessing Officer in the hands of Sh. Anand Jain and Naresh Jain which has been confirmed by him in their respective appeals, hence, no further addition can be made in the hands of the assessee company and deleted the protective addition of Rs. 12,63,58,5....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....perused the case law cited by the Ld. AR for the assessee. We have gone through the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and found that Ld. CIT(A) has elaborately discussed the issue in dispute and deleted the addition in dispute by observing as under:- "....It is noticed that the appellant company has received funds from various concerns and transferred the same to the above mentioned companies/concerns immediately thereafter, and accordingly, appellant company is not beneficiary company. The above arrangement of funds is nothing but part of modus operandi of the accommodation entry provider to introduce the unaccounted funds of the beneficiaries in their respective bank accounts. Further, the AO also in the assessment order has obser....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ar aspect and identical facts and circumstances, the Tribunal held that since the substantive addition has already been completed in the case of Sh. Naresh Kumar Jain, hence, no protective addition can be confirmed at this juncture in the case of the assessee i.e. Anand Kumar Jain in Revenue's ITA No. 2890/Del/2019 (AY 2012-13) and accordingly dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. 7.2 In view of facts and circumstances of the present case and respectfully following the precedent, as aforesaid, we are of the considered view that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly decided the issue in favour of the Assessee and deleted the addition in dispute, after elaborately discussing the issue in detail, which did not require any interference on our part. Hence, w....