CIT vs. SIDH VINAYAK DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD

ITA 790/2010 Page 1 of 3

#16 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ITA 790/2010

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suruchii Aggarwal,

Advocate

versus

M/S. SIDH VINAYAK DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent

Through: None

Date of Decision: 30th August, 2010

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

MANMOHAN, J:

ITA 790/2010 Page 2 of 3

assessee by two parties namely, M.V. Marketing Pvt. Ltd. and Ethnic Creations Pvt. Ltd. She submitted that under Section 68 of the Act, 1961, the onus for proving the source of money is on the assessee and no further burden lies on the Revenue to show that income is from any particular source. She pointed out that the assessee had failed to produce before the Assessing Officer either the books of accounts or principal officers or Directors of those persons who had given credit entries. Consequently, according to her, the creditworthiness of the parties and genuineness of the transactions were not proved. 3. However, upon a perusal of the file, we find that the addition was deleted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for short “CIT(A)”] and Tribunal on the ground that the creditors had filed their bank accounts and had even furnished their PAN details. In fact, the tribunal in its order has observed as under :- “4. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the assessee has furnished the confirmation of the parties. The assessment order also shows that the assessee had been asked to produce the parties in person and this was not done. A perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(A) clearly shows that in the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had filed the confirmation letters from the parties, the PAN of the parties and the photocopy of the cheques through which the payments had been received. It is also noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) has verified the assessment records and also found that the A.O. had directly called for the bank accounts of the two parties along with accounts opening forms and other papers and the transactions were found recorded in the bank account as also that of the paying companies. Though the A.O. has done verification directly from the bank accounts of the two paying companies, he has not mentioned anything about this in the assessment order. It is also noticed from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) that the Tripartite agreement

ITA 790/2010 Page 3 of 3

had also been referred to in the assessment proceedings. The order of Ld. CIT(A) also categorically mentions that the confirmation letter contains their PAN details and that they are assessed to tax. The CIT(A) had also given categorical finding that the amounts have been duly reflected in the bank accounts of both the parties and they are also reflected in the accounts and balance sheets of both the paying companies. In these circumstances, as no evidence to rebut the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) have been placed before us, we are of the view that the findings of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue which has been done after verifying the assessment records, is on a right footing and do not call for any interference.

MANMOHAN, J

CHIEF JUSTICE AUGUST 30, 2010 rn