2026 (4) TMI 1128

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....9 vide order dated 24th July, 2019. Assessment was framed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-13, New Delhi for the assessment year 2011-12 under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') vide order dated 17th December, 2018. 2. The first issue in this appeal of the Revenue is as regards the order of learned CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investment of Rs. 20 lakhs and consequent brokerage charges of 2% at Rs. 40,000/-. For this, the Revenue has raised following ground No.1:- "1. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) is correct in deleting the addition on account of unexplained investment and on account of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee submitted copy of account of Rasraj Enclave Maker Pvt.Ltd. It was contended that the said amount given to Rasraj Enclave in earlier year is refunded to the assessee and it is not cash credit. The Assessing Officer simplicitor held on the basis of the credit entry in this year i.e. assessment year 2011-12 relevant to financial year 2010-11 that the amount of Rs. 20 lakhs is received from Rasraj Enclave bank account No.015R24699050. He was not convinced and hence, he added this amount of Rs. 20 lakhs as unexplained under Section 68 of the Act. The Assessing Officer also added consequent commission of 2% on this entry under Section 69C of the Act amounting to Rs. 40,000/-. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to Rasraj Enclave Maker Pvt.Ltd. by the assessee on various dates i.e., 28.04.2010, 02.06.2010, 05.06.2010 and 22.06.2010, which was subsequently returned on 17.07.2010 to the assessee by Rasraj Enclave Maker Pvt.Ltd. This is simplicitor money returned by the debtor and nothing else. To prove this, the assessee has filed capital account before the Assessing Officer which is part of record. In view of the above facts, we find that learned CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition and we confirm his order on this issue. 7. The next issue in this appeal of the Revenue is as regards the order of learned CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 1,93,20,640/- on account of bogus purchases and fabricated bills of purchases and sales. For this, Revenu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Ashok Minda categorically denied that it does not deal with trading of garments, rather, it only does the business of spare parts of automobile. The Assessing Officer made addition only on one premise that the assessee has carried out trading in garments and made bogus purchases of trading in garments, Learned CIT(A) deleted the addition vide paragraph 5 (iv) and (v) as under:- "5. (iv) The addition of Rs. 1,93,20,640/- have been made on account of trading in garments on the basis of statement of Ashok Minda recorded during the course of search in which it has been stated in question no.2 of statement that sale and purchase of trading of garments is not genuine. On the basis of statement of Shri Ashok Minda recorded on 20/12/2017....