9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1598X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stt. Year 2007-08 was filed by the assessee on 13.10.2007 declaring nil income and it was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). However, subsequently, search and seizure operation u/s132 of the Act was conducted in Brahmaputra group of companies on 28.9.2010 during which various books of accounts and documents including some belonging to the assessee were found and seized. Notice u/s 153 read with section 153A of the Act and subsequently u/s 153A/153C of the Act was issued. Basing of certain documents in the form of Annexures A-6, A-7 and A-10 and also on the statement of one Mr. Sampath Sharma, Director, learned AO made an addition of Rs. 10 lacs under section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained share capital. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordings on the documents reflected accommodation entries obtained by the Brahmputra group, as such, the authorities below are justified in making addition and sustaining the same. 5. At the outset, learned AR submitted that the five documents relied upon by the learned AO in this matter were also relied upon by the revenue in the case of another group company i.e. M/s Brahmputra Finlease P. Ltd. ITA No.3332/Del/2017 and a coordinate bench of this Tribunal by order dated 29.12.2017 discussed the matter at length and found that the revenue failed to bring on record any cogent reasons to connect these documents with the additions of share capital and inasmuch as no material, much less incriminating, supporting the addition is available on rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 31.05.2008 and further comments of the payment of same amount by cash to Murari Lal Aggarwal (MLA) is made ITA No. 3332/Del/2017 iii. The back side of the above page 1 of Annexure A-7 mentions that Sarat Aggarwal was paid with cash of Rs. 30 lakhs bring back equal amount in other form. The date of noting is 04.06.2008. iv. Page 1 of Annexure A-10 - it contains a hand written extract of cash book containing entry of Rs. 5 lakhs in the main of M.L. Aggarwal. It also shows as debit of Rs. 3 lakhs in the name of Sarat Aggarwal. The entries are for the date 28.05.2008, the date of writing of this page. v. Page No. 4 of above Annexure A-10 contains record of 30 lakhs in the name Mr. A Singhal and M.L. Aggarwala dividing into Rs. 25 lakhs and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It also shows as debit of Rs. 3 lakhs in the name of Sarat Aggarwal. The entries are for the date 28.05.2008, the date of writing of this page. v. Page No. 4 of above Annexure A-10 contains record of 30 lakhs in the name Mr. A Singhal and M.L. Aggarwala dividing into Rs. 25 lakhs and 5 lakhs respectively. On this page the name of Sudarshan Casting P. Ltd. is also written. During the course of search and post search investigation, the assessees of this group have not been able to explain the above entries satisfactorily. Though these entries are to be dealt with in relevant cases but this also proves the fact that this group is engaged in bring back their unaccounted/undisclosed income in the guise of share capital/share application money. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t no incriminating material qua the addition made is found during the course of search from the premises of the assessee. Accordingly, above contention of Ld. CIT(DR) are rejected. She also submitted that during the course of search, hard disks of computers and others material were also seized which contained incriminating material. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to substantiate the claim either by the impugned assessment order or through any other documentary evidence. In the assessment order, there is no mention that any incriminating material is found in hard disk etc. Thus, this contention of Ld. CIT(A) is also rejected. 8. Further, in respect of relevance and reliability of the statement of Shri Sampath Sharma, Director, the Tribunal observed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the instant assessment year in view of the finding of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra). The grounds No. 1 and 1.1 of appeal are accordingly allowed. 10. Since the facts of these two cases are identical and the observations of the Tribunal are very much applicable to the facts of this case also. In these circumstances, while respectfully following the reasoning and the conclusions reached by a coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the Brahmputra group case in M/s Brahmputra Finlease P. Ltd. vs DCIT, ITA No.3332/Del/2017, we find it difficult to sustain the additions made. We, therefore, while allowing the grounds of appeal, direct the learned AO to delete the impugned additions. 10. In the result, appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
