CIT vs. GOEL SONS GOLDEN ESTATE PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 212/2012 . . . CIT ..... Appellant . Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. . versus . . . GOEL SONS GOLDEN ESTATE PVT LTD ..... Respondent . Through: None. . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 11.04.2012 . . . The Revenue by this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (?Act?, for short) impugns the order dated 05.08.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (?Tribunal?, for short) in the case of Goel Estate Sons Pvt. Ltd. in relation to assessment year 2006-07. . 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order passed by the Tribunal is perverse and in fact one S.H. Mallick had given a statement, which is re-produced in the assessment order saying that he had provided accommodation entries and the said statement conclusively proves that share money of ` 30,00,000/- allegedly received by the respondent-assessee from 5 companies are sham and bogus transactions. . 3. We have examined the said contention and find that the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings has filed confirmation letters from the companies, their PAN number, copy of bank statements, affidavits and balance sheet. Thereafter the Assessing Officer had asked the assessee to produce the said Directors/ parties. Assessee expressed its inability to produce them. The Assessing Officer did not consequent thereto conduct any inquiry and closed the proceedings. This is a case where the Assessing Officer has failed to conduct necessary inquiry, verification and deal with the matter in depth specially after the affidavit/confirmation along with the bank statements etc. were filed. In case the Assessing Officer had conducted the said enquiries and investigation probably the challenge made by the Revenue would be justified. In the absence of these inquiries and non-verification of the details at the time of assessment proceedings, the factual findings recorded by the Assessing Officer were incomplete and sparse. The impugned order passed cannot be treated and regarded as perverse. The appeal is dismissed as no substantial question of law arises. . . . SANJIV KHANNA, J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . APRIL 11, 2012 . hs . . . . . $ 2 .