CIT vs. SHARMILEE FURNISHING PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 288/2012 . . . CIT ..... Appellant . Through : Ms. Suruchi Aggarwal, Advocate. . . . versus . . . SHARMILEE FURNISHING PVT LTD ..... Respondent . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 14.05.2012 . . . C.M. No. 7804/2012 (Delay) . 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 73 days in re- filing the appeal. It is stated that the counsel for the Revenue had undergone a surgery and, therefore, the appeal could not be re-filed within time. . 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 73 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. . 3. C.M. stands disposed of. . ITA No. 288/2012 . 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) have given concurrent findings . . . ITA 288/2012 page 1 of 3 . as far as payment to Smt. Sharmille Chopra and Sh. Gaurav Chopra are concerned, the same was by way of account payee instruments. There is nothing on record to controvert or deny the said finding except for the reliance placed by the Assessing Officer on the audit report. The Revenue can rely upon the audit report, but once the assessee had produced necessary documents and statements of bank of accounts to establish and state that the transactions were through crossed bank instruments then reliance on the audit report alone would be futile. The factual position has to be examined and then it has to be decided, whether or not there were violations of Section 271E read with Section 269SS/269T. We may also note that penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings. It is not averred or stated that the statement of bank account is wrong or false. . 2. With regard to the payment to the partnership firm M/s Electric Living it has been held by the CIT(A) and ITAT that Sharmille Chopra and Gaurav Chopra were partners to the said firm, which stands dissolved. . Book entries were made with reference to the amount standing to the credit of the partners. Payments were made by four crossed cheques to discharge the liability of Gaurav Chopra. The said factual findings are not denied. . . . ITA 288/2012 page 2 of 3 . 3. As the factual findings recorded by the ITAT are correct and have not been controverted, we do not find any reason to entertain the present appeal. The same is dismissed in liminie. . . . . . . . SANJIV KHANNA, J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . MAY 14, 2012/AK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ITA 288/2012 page 3 of 3 . $ 4 .