Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These appeals by the Revenue are directed against separate These appeals by the Revenue are directed against separate These appeals by the Revenue are directed against separate orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) orders passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], for relevant assessment Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], for relevant assessment Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’], for relevant assessment years. As common issues-in-dispute are involved in these appeals same were dispute are involved in these appeals same were dispute are involved in these appeals same were heard together and disposed of heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order by way of this consolidated order for convenience and avoid repetition of facts. for convenience and avoid repetition of facts.
First, we take e take up the appeal in the appeal in ITA No. 2114/M/2019 (Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd.) for assessment year 2011 Exports Pvt. Ltd.) for assessment year 2011-12. The Exports Pvt. Ltd.) for assessment year 2011 grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under : grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under : grounds raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under :
Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 3 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors.
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs 4,75,00,000/ 4,75,00,000/- on account of unaccounted investment and of ccounted investment and of Rs 11,87,500/ Rs 11,87,500/- on account of unaccounted commission u/s on account of unaccounted commission u/s 69C without considering the fact that the said entry is 69C without considering the fact that the said entry is 69C without considering the fact that the said entry is merely an accommodation entry and the assessee was a merely an accommodation entry and the assessee was a merely an accommodation entry and the assessee was a conduit for introducing unaccounted funds which has been conduit for introducing unaccounted funds which has been conduit for introducing unaccounted funds which has been proved proved beyond doubt.
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs 4,75,00,000/ 4,75,00,000/-on account of unaccounted investment by on account of unaccounted investment by observing that the investment reflected in the balance observing that the investment reflected in the balance observing that the investment reflected in the balance sheet is out of sheet is out of corresponding liabilities as the assessee corresponding liabilities as the assessee company is not carrying any business actually and the said company is not carrying any business actually and the said company is not carrying any business actually and the said entry is Junexplained entry is Junexplained 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs Ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the protective addition of Rs 4,75,00,000/ 4,75,00,000/-on account of unaccounted investment and of account of unaccounted investment and of Rs 11,87,500/ Rs 11,87,500/-on account of unaccounted commission u/s on account of unaccounted commission u/s 69C without considering the fact that the addition made on 69C without considering the fact that the addition made on 69C without considering the fact that the addition made on substantive basis has not reached its finality substantive basis has not reached its finality 3. At the outset, we may like to mention that despite notifying At the outset, we may like to mention that despite At the outset, we may like to mention that despite none attended on behalf of the assessee. The notice was sent none attended on behalf of the assessee. The notice was sent none attended on behalf of the assessee. The notice was sent through registered post as well as through registered post as well as duly served by the Inspector of duly served by the Inspector of the office of the Income Tax Department by way of affixture. The the office of the Income Tax Department by way of affixture. The the office of the Income Tax Department by way of affixture. The Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 4 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors.
said service report forwarded by the Assessing Offic said service report forwarded by the Assessing Offic said service report forwarded by the Assessing Officer is placed on the file. Therefore, the appeal was heard Therefore, the appeal was heard ex-parte qua the assessee qua the assessee after hearing arguments of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR). after hearing arguments of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR). after hearing arguments of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR).
Briefly stated, facts as cu Briefly stated, facts as culled out from the order of the lower lled out from the order of the lower authorities are that assessee concern authorities are that assessee concern, which which was indirectly controlled by Shri Rinku Patodia (Dummy Director) controlled by Shri Rinku Patodia (Dummy Director) controlled by Shri Rinku Patodia (Dummy Director), used for the purpose of lowering/routing lowering/routing/introducing the unaccounted funds unaccounted funds by taking accommodation entries from concerns of Shri Pravin by taking accommodation entries from concerns of Shri Pravin by taking accommodation entries from concerns of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain. The Assessing Officer during scruti Kumar Jain. The Assessing Officer during scrutiny proceedings ny proceedings observed that the assessee has been used as a conduit at the assessee has been used as a conduit at the assessee has been used as a conduit for lowering/routing the introduction of unaccounted funds in M/s lowering/routing the introduction of unaccounted funds in M/s lowering/routing the introduction of unaccounted funds in M/s Solitaire Texfab & Traders Textiles P. Ltd. ( Solitaire Texfab & Traders Textiles P. Ltd. (₹25,00,000/ 25,00,000/-) ; M/s Bhagwat Textiles Pvt. Ltd. ( Bhagwat Textiles Pvt. Ltd. (₹1,00,00,000/-) ; M/s Starwo ) ; M/s Starwood Exports Pvt. Ltd. (₹2,50,00,000/ 2,50,00,000/-) and M/s Rikosh Fashions Pvt. Ltd. Rikosh Fashions Pvt. Ltd. (₹1,00,00,000/-) totally totally aggregating to ₹4,75,00,000/ 4,75,00,000/- from concerns of M/s Pravin Kumar Jain. The Assessing Officer concerns of M/s Pravin Kumar Jain. The Assessing Officer concerns of M/s Pravin Kumar Jain. The Assessing Officer
Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 5 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors. accordingly made substantive additions u/s 68 in the hands of the accordingly made substantive additions u/s 68 in the hands of the accordingly made substantive additions u/s 68 in the hands of the M/s Solitaire Texfab & Traders Textiles Pvt. Ltd., M/s Bhagwat /s Solitaire Texfab & Traders Textiles Pvt. Ltd., M/s Bhagwat /s Solitaire Texfab & Traders Textiles Pvt. Ltd., M/s Bhagwat Textiles Pvt. Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Textiles Pvt. Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Textiles Pvt. Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions Pvt. Ltd. on account of unexplained share application Fashions Pvt. Ltd. on account of unexplained share application Fashions Pvt. Ltd. on account of unexplained share application money and made protective addition in the hands of the assessee. money and made protective addition in the hands of the assessee. money and made protective addition in the hands of the assessee. The Assessing Officer also made addition for commission @ 2% for The Assessing Officer also made addition for commission @ 2% for The Assessing Officer also made addition for commission @ 2% for obtaining sale accommodation entries on protective basis in the obtaining sale accommodation entries on protective basis in the obtaining sale accommodation entries on protective basis in the hands of the assessee. hands of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition observing The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition observing as under:
“5.3 The contentions of the assessee have been 5.3 The contentions of the assessee have been duly considered. duly considered. The AO has made substantive addition in M/s Solitaire Texfab& The AO has made substantive addition in M/s Solitaire Texfab& The AO has made substantive addition in M/s Solitaire Texfab& Traders Textiles P Ltd, M/s. Bhagwat Textiles P. Ltd., M/s. Traders Textiles P Ltd, M/s. Bhagwat Textiles P. Ltd., M/s. Traders Textiles P Ltd, M/s. Bhagwat Textiles P. Ltd., M/s. Starwood Exports P. Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd. on Starwood Exports P. Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd. on Starwood Exports P. Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd. on account of the accommodation entries received from concern account of the accommodation entries received from concern account of the accommodation entries received from concerns of Pravin Kumar Jain after routing/layering through the assessee Pravin Kumar Jain after routing/layering through the assessee Pravin Kumar Jain after routing/layering through the assessee and has made protective addition in the hands of the our assessee. and has made protective addition in the hands of the our assessee. and has made protective addition in the hands of the our assessee. 5.3.1 As regards the substantive addition of Rs. 25,00,000/ 5.3.1 As regards the substantive addition of Rs. 25,00,000/ 5.3.1 As regards the substantive addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- in M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd., the same h Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd., the same h Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd., the same has been adjudicated vide my order in appeal No CIT(A) adjudicated vide my order in appeal No CIT(A)-51/IT-354/16 354/16-17 dated 20.11.2018. The operative part of he said order is from Para dated 20.11.2018. The operative part of he said order is from Para dated 20.11.2018. The operative part of he said order is from Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 6 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors. substantive additions u/s 68 made of Rs 1,60,00,000 substantive additions u/s 68 made of Rs 1,60,00,000/- have been have been confirmed which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs confirmed which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs confirmed which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs 25,00,000/-.
5.3.2 Also, M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd the AO has made the 5.3.2 Also, M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd the AO has made the 5.3.2 Also, M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd the AO has made the substantive u/s 68 of Rs 1,00,00,000/ substantive u/s 68 of Rs 1,00,00,000/- and the same has been and the same has been adjudicated vide my order in appeal No CIT adjudicated vide my order in appeal No CIT(A)-51/IT-328/16 328/16-17 dated 03.11.2017. The operative part of the said order is from dated 03.11.2017. The operative part of the said order is from dated 03.11.2017. The operative part of the said order is from Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the substantive additions u/s 68 made of Rs 13,05,00,000/ the substantive additions u/s 68 made of Rs 13,05,00,000/ the substantive additions u/s 68 made of Rs 13,05,00,000/- have been confirmed which includes the additi confirmed which includes the addition related to our assessee on related to our assessee of Rs 1,00,00,000/ of Rs 1,00,00,000/-.
5.3.3 Similarly, the substantive addition of Rs. 2,50,00,000/ 5.3.3 Similarly, the substantive addition of Rs. 2,50,00,000/ 5.3.3 Similarly, the substantive addition of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- in M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd., the same has been adjudicated vide my Starwood Exports P Ltd., the same has been adjudicated vide my Starwood Exports P Ltd., the same has been adjudicated vide my order in appeal No CIT(A) order in appeal No CIT(A)-51/IT-330/16-17 dated 03.11.2017. 17 dated 03.11.2017. The operative The operative part of the said order is from Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at part of the said order is from Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the substantive substantive additions u/s 68 made of Rs 10,10,00,000/ additions u/s 68 made of Rs 10,10,00,000/- have been confirmed have been confirmed which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs 2,50,00,000/-.
5.3.4 Similarly, the substantive addition of Rs. 50,00,000/ 4 Similarly, the substantive addition of Rs. 50,00,000/ 4 Similarly, the substantive addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- in M/s Rikosh Fashions Ltd., the same has been adjudicated vide my order Rikosh Fashions Ltd., the same has been adjudicated vide my order Rikosh Fashions Ltd., the same has been adjudicated vide my order in appeal No CIT(A) in appeal No CIT(A)-51/IT-355/16-17 dated 20.11.2018. The 17 dated 20.11.2018. The operative part of the said order is from Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at operative part of the said order is from Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at operative part of the said order is from Para 6.3.1 to 6.3.26 at pages 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the substantive es 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the substantive es 13 to 25. In the said appellate order, the substantive additions u/s 68 made of Rs 4,75,00,000/ additions u/s 68 made of Rs 4,75,00,000/- have been confirmed have been confirmed which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs which includes the addition related to our assessee of Rs 50,00,000/-. However, the AO has made protective addition u/s 68 . However, the AO has made protective addition u/s 68 . However, the AO has made protective addition u/s 68 of Rs 1,00,00,000/ ,000/- in the hands of the assessee. As noted earlier, in the hands of the assessee. As noted earlier,
Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 7 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors. the assessee has also pointed out that as per the Annual accounts the assessee has also pointed out that as per the Annual accounts the assessee has also pointed out that as per the Annual accounts of the assessee, the investment made by the assessee in M/s Rikosh of the assessee, the investment made by the assessee in M/s Rikosh of the assessee, the investment made by the assessee in M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd is of only Rs 50,00,000/ Fashions P Ltd is of only Rs 50,00,000/- and therefore, it has been and therefore, it has been contended that the said substantive and protective additions contended that the said substantive and protective additions contended that the said substantive and protective additions should have been made of Rs 50,00,000/ should have been made of Rs 50,00,000/- only. The AO is directed only. The AO is directed to verify this claim of the assessee and adopt the correct figure in to verify this claim of the assessee and adopt the correct figure in to verify this claim of the assessee and adopt the correct figure in respect of the protective addition in respect of M/s Rikosh respect of the protective addition in respect of M/s Rikosh respect of the protective addition in respect of M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd in the hands of our assessee and also take ashions P Ltd in the hands of our assessee and also take ashions P Ltd in the hands of our assessee and also take appropriate action if required in the hands of M/s Rikosh Fashions appropriate action if required in the hands of M/s Rikosh Fashions appropriate action if required in the hands of M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd. wherein the substantive addition has been made. P Ltd. wherein the substantive addition has been made.
5.3.5 It is observed that the AO has made the said additions of Rs. 5.3.5 It is observed that the AO has made the said additions of Rs. 5.3.5 It is observed that the AO has made the said additions of Rs. 4,75,00,000/- in the hands of our assessee on protective basis by in the hands of our assessee on protective basis by holding that the said investments in M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders holding that the said investments in M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders holding that the said investments in M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd. (Rs 25,00,000/ & Textiles P Ltd. (Rs 25,00,000/-), M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd. (Rs. ), M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd. (Rs. 1,00,00,000/-), M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. (Rs. 2,50,00,000/ ), M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. (Rs. 2,50,00,000/ ), M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. (Rs. 2,50,00,000/-) and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd (Rs 1,00,00,000/ and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd (Rs 1,00,00,000/-) are unexplained. ) are unexplained. It is noted that the provisions of section 69 can be invoked if (i) the It is noted that the provisions of section 69 can be invoked if (i) the It is noted that the provisions of section 69 can be invoked if (i) the said investment is not recorded in the regular books and (ii) the said investment is not recorded in the regular books and (ii) the said investment is not recorded in the regular books and (ii) the assessee offers no explanation about the source or t assessee offers no explanation about the source or the explanation he explanation offered is not satisfactory. It is relevant to note that both these offered is not satisfactory. It is relevant to note that both these offered is not satisfactory. It is relevant to note that both these conditions are to be cumulatively satisfied. The Hon'ble Orissa conditions are to be cumulatively satisfied. The Hon'ble Orissa conditions are to be cumulatively satisfied. The Hon'ble Orissa High Court in the case of Aurobindo Sanitary Stores (276 ITR 549) High Court in the case of Aurobindo Sanitary Stores (276 ITR 549) High Court in the case of Aurobindo Sanitary Stores (276 ITR 549) has held that the primary condition to be s has held that the primary condition to be satisfied before invoking atisfied before invoking the provisions of section 69 is that there should be a finding of the the provisions of section 69 is that there should be a finding of the the provisions of section 69 is that there should be a finding of the AO that the investments are not recorded in the regular books. In AO that the investments are not recorded in the regular books. In AO that the investments are not recorded in the regular books. In the instant case, there is no dispute that the said amount of the instant case, there is no dispute that the said amount of the instant case, there is no dispute that the said amount of investment is duly recorded in th investment is duly recorded in the regular books of accounts. The e regular books of accounts. The source of an investment which is reflected in the Balance Sheet is source of an investment which is reflected in the Balance Sheet is source of an investment which is reflected in the Balance Sheet is out of the corresponding liabilities shown in the Balance Sheet out of the corresponding liabilities shown in the Balance Sheet out of the corresponding liabilities shown in the Balance Sheet
Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 8 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors. including the ones which got squared up and therefore cannot be including the ones which got squared up and therefore cannot be including the ones which got squared up and therefore cannot be treated as unexplained. Also treated as unexplained. Also, the corresponding additions have , the corresponding additions have been made in the hands of M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles been made in the hands of M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles been made in the hands of M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd. M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. P Ltd. M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. P Ltd. M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions PLtd on substantive basis have been and M/s Rikosh Fashions PLtd on substantive basis have been and M/s Rikosh Fashions PLtd on substantive basis have been confirmed vide my orders in App confirmed vide my orders in Appeal No CIT(A) 51/IT-354/16 354/16-17 dated 20.11.2018, Appeal No. CIT(A) dated 20.11.2018, Appeal No. CIT(A)-51/IT-328/16-17 dated 17 dated 03.11.2017, Appeal No.CIT(A) 03.11.2017, Appeal No.CIT(A)-51/IT-330/16-17 dated 03.11.2017 17 dated 03.11.2017 and and Appeal Appeal No.CIT(A)-51/IT-355/16-17 No.CIT(A) 17 dated dated 20.11.2018. 20.11.2018. Therefore, in principle, the action of the AO in ma Therefore, in principle, the action of the AO in making the said king the said protective addition u/s 68 cannot be sustained. protective addition u/s 68 cannot be sustained.
5.3.6 Similarly, theprotective addition made by the AO u/s 69C of 5.3.6 Similarly, theprotective addition made by the AO u/s 69C of 5.3.6 Similarly, theprotective addition made by the AO u/s 69C of Rs 11,87,500/ Rs 11,87,500/- being the unaccounted estimated commission @ being the unaccounted estimated commission @ 2.5% on the accommodation entry of the said investment of Rs 2.5% on the accommodation entry of the said investment of Rs 2.5% on the accommodation entry of the said investment of Rs 4,75,00,000/- also cannot be sustained in principle considering also cannot be sustained in principle considering that the protective addition of unexplained investment itself has in that the protective addition of unexplained investment itself has in that the protective addition of unexplained investment itself has in principle been deleted and also because the Corresponding principle been deleted and also because the Corresponding principle been deleted and also because the Corresponding substantive additions made u/s 69C by the AO in the hands of M/s substantive additions made u/s 69C by the AO in the hands of M/s substantive additions made u/s 69C by the AO in the hands of M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd, M/s Bhagwat Textiles P re Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd, M/s Bhagwat Textiles P re Texfab Traders & Textiles P Ltd, M/s Bhagwat Textiles P Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports P Ltd. and M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd on substantive basis have been confirmed vide my orders in Appeal on substantive basis have been confirmed vide my orders in Appeal on substantive basis have been confirmed vide my orders in Appeal No CIT(A)-51/IT 51/IT-354/16-17 dated 20.11.2018, Appeal No. CIT(A) 17 dated 20.11.2018, Appeal No. CIT(A)- 51/IT-328/16- -17 dated 03.11.2017, Appeal No.CIT(A) 17 dated 03.11.2017, Appeal No.CIT(A)-51/IT- 330/16-17 dated 03.11.2017 and Appeal No.CIT(A) 17 dated 03.11.2017 and Appeal No.CIT(A)-51/IT 355/16 51/IT 355/16- 17 dated 20.11.2018. However, as noted earlier, the AO is directed 17 dated 20.11.2018. However, as noted earlier, the AO is directed 17 dated 20.11.2018. However, as noted earlier, the AO is directed to verify the claim of the assessee in respect of the quantum of to verify the claim of the assessee in respect of the quantum of to verify the claim of the assessee in respect of the quantum of substantive and corresponding protective addition related to M/s and corresponding protective addition related to M/s and corresponding protective addition related to M/s Rikosh Fashions P Ltd and accordingly adopt the correct figure Rikosh Fashions P Ltd and accordingly adopt the correct figure Rikosh Fashions P Ltd and accordingly adopt the correct figure while computing the protective addition u/s 69C being the while computing the protective addition u/s 69C being the while computing the protective addition u/s 69C being the Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 9 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors. unexplained commission expenditure. Accordingly, ground Nos 1 unexplained commission expenditure. Accordingly, ground Nos 1 unexplained commission expenditure. Accordingly, ground Nos 1 to 3 of the appeal to 3 of the appeal are partly allowed.”
We have heard submissions of the Ld. DR and perused the We have heard submissions of the Ld. DR and perused the We have heard submissions of the Ld. DR and perused the relevant material on record. We find that substantive addition made relevant material on record. We find that substantive addition made relevant material on record. We find that substantive addition made by the Assessing Officer has already been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) by the Assessing Officer has already been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) by the Assessing Officer has already been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) in respective cases and therefore, he is justified in deleting the cases and therefore, he is justified in deleting the cases and therefore, he is justified in deleting the protective addition made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the protective addition made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the protective addition made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the assessee. The addition in respect of same item cannot be made in The addition in respect of same item cannot be made in The addition in respect of same item cannot be made in the hands of two assessee. The Appellate Authority is required to the hands of two assessee. The Appellate Authority is required to the hands of two assessee. The Appellate Authority is required to decide on the basis of evidence and give finding, in which decide on the basis of evidence and give finding, in which decide on the basis of evidence and give finding, in which case the addition has to be made. The Ld. CIT(A) in the case has accordingly addition has to be made. The Ld. CIT(A) in the case has accordingly addition has to be made. The Ld. CIT(A) in the case has accordingly deleted protective addition. deleted protective addition. We do not find any error in the order of We do not find any error in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue-in-dispute and accordingly accordingly, we uphold the same. The appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed. the same. The appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed. the same. The appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed.
5.1 The grounds raised in the remaining appeals The grounds raised in the remaining appeals being identical to being identical to ground raised in ground raised in ITA No. 2114/M/2019, therefore, same same are decided mutatis mutandis.
Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors Attractive Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors 10 & Four Ors. ITA NO. 2114/M/2019 & Four Ors.
In the result, all the appeals filed b In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. y the Revenue are dismissed.