CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.

299 ITR 268High Court2008#169 most cited

What is CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer cannot add share capital or share premium amounts if the assessee provides the identity and creditworthiness of the subscriber and establishes the genuineness of the transaction. The court may admit additional evidence under Rule 46A, such as the PAN identity of the creditor.

426

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. · section 68 · share capital · share premium · creditworthiness of creditor · source of source · genuineness of transaction · addition u/s 68 · PAN identity · Rule 46A

Also reported as

158 Taxmann 440207 CTR 38

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 133(6)Section 147Section 69ASection 1961Section 131Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditorsource of sourceshare capital and share premiumpaper companyshare application moneyaddition u/s 68live linkadmission of additional evidenceentry operatorgenuineness of the transactionaddition under section 68rule 46a

Judgments citing CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.

Luminant Investments Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle -40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4356/MUM/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2006-07 Luminant Investments Ltd., Dy. Cit Central Circle 40, (Formerly Known As Luminant Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Investment Pvt. Ltd.) Mumbai-400020. 121, Radha Bhuvan, 1St Floor, Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Mumbai-400023. Pan No. Aaacl 0834 A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DRFor Respondent: None
Section 68

…Delhi high court in ng the decision by the Delhi high court in the decision reported at CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. the decision reported at CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. the decision reported at CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Del), dismissing the Revenue's appeals, which [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Del), dismissing the Revenue's appeals, which [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Del), dismissing the Revenue's appeals, which is in respect of three appeals, i.e., in the case of CIT vs. (1) Divine is in respect of three appeals, i.e., in the case of CIT vs. (1) Divine is in respect of three ap…

ITO, Kolkata vs. Blackberry Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1234/KOL/2023[2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253Section 68

…at pages 2 and 3 of the assessment order. In view of the special facts and circumstances as well as the judicial decision relied upon in the case of Commissioner of Income- tax vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. reported in [2007] 158 Taxman 440 (Delhi)/[2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi)/[2007] 207 CTR 38 (Delhi)[16-11-2006] the order u/s 147/143(3) of the Act was set aside vide the order passed u/s 263 of the Act with the direction to the Ld. AO as mentioned hereunder: “i) Examine the genuineness and source of share capital, not on a test check basis, but in respect of each and every shareholder by conducting independent…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Filatex India Limited, Delhi

ITA 5000/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

…uthority has deleted the addition in dispute on the basis of various documentary evidence filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer as well as before him. The hon'ble Supreme Court of India (sic.) in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) which has confirmed the order of the hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that once the identity of the shareholder have been established, even if there is a case of bogus share capital, it cannot be added in the hands of the company unless any adverse evidence is not on record. The learned first appellate authority has examined the document…

ACIT, Delhi vs. Grand Estate LLP, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4740/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…uthority has deleted the addition in dispute on the basis of various documentary evidence filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer as well as before him. The hon'ble Supreme Court of India (sic.) in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) which has confirmed the order of the hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that once the identity of the shareholder have been established, even if there is a case of bogus share capital, it cannot be added in the hands of the company unless any adverse evidence is not on record. The learned first appellate authority has examined the document…

ACIT, Circle-44(1), New Delhi vs. Ads Associated Group, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed and appeal of

ITA 945/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Ads Associated Group Acit, Ff-2, Harmony Apartments, 52/78, Vs. Circle-41(1), Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aacaa8728L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Acit, Ads Associated Group Circle-41(1), Vs. Ff-2, Harmony Apartments, 52/78, New Delhi. Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. Pan No.Aacaa8728L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

…n a se conducted by the income Tax Department, and was assessed as such vide the assessment order passed by his AO. In this regard, the appellant has also relied upon the Case Law of Jurisdict1 High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. (299 ITR 268) and CIT vs Dhooti Pearls and Investment Ltd. 64taxmann.com 329 (Delhi). Further fie has contended the the basis of AO's report, the assessing officer of Sh, Avtar Singh Kochar reopened the assessment u/s 148 on 20.03.2017. Further while passing the assessment order, the matter of investment of Rs.7.83 crores was intensively investigated and disc…

Ads Associated Group, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-41(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed and appeal of

ITA 926/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Ads Associated Group Acit, Ff-2, Harmony Apartments, 52/78, Vs. Circle-41(1), Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aacaa8728L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Acit, Ads Associated Group Circle-41(1), Vs. Ff-2, Harmony Apartments, 52/78, New Delhi. Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. Pan No.Aacaa8728L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

…n a se conducted by the income Tax Department, and was assessed as such vide the assessment order passed by his AO. In this regard, the appellant has also relied upon the Case Law of Jurisdict1 High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. (299 ITR 268) and CIT vs Dhooti Pearls and Investment Ltd. 64taxmann.com 329 (Delhi). Further fie has contended the the basis of AO's report, the assessing officer of Sh, Avtar Singh Kochar reopened the assessment u/s 148 on 20.03.2017. Further while passing the assessment order, the matter of investment of Rs.7.83 crores was intensively investigated and disc…

Income Tax Officer-1, Morena vs. Shri Agrasen Logistics, Jotai Road, Porsa

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…uthority has deleted the addition in dispute on the basis of various documentary evidence filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer as well as before him. The hon'ble Supreme Court of India (sic.) in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) which has confirmed the order of the hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that once the identity of the shareholder have been established, even if there is a case of bogus share capital, it cannot be added in the hands of the company unless any adverse evidence is not on record. The learned first appellate authority has examined the document…

Prajita Investments Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2850/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri. Girish Agrawal ()

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68

…quiries. He submitted that, this fact that applicants continue to be shareholder of the assessee has been noted by the Ld. AO. 6.2 The Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Divine Leasing and Finance reported in 299 ITR 268 wherein Hon’ble Court observed that when details of the applicants are available with the assessing officer and if they are found to be bogus applicant the department is free to proceed and reopen their individuals assessment in accordance with law. The Ld. AR submitted that nothing contrary to what has been submitted by the assessee has been obs…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Juicy Beverages Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2254/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2254/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Acit, Juicy Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-15, Vs. 1643, Sector-B, Pocket-1, Room No.353, E-2, Ara Centre, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacj9570D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…a finance Ltd. (1994] 205 ITR 9g (FB) (Delhi), CIT vs. Nipuan Auto (P) Ltd. ((2014) 49 iaxmann.com 13 (Del.) 361 ITR 155 (Del.), Commissioner of Income-tax vs Winstral Petrochemicals P. Ltd. 2011330 ITR 603(Det.), CIT v. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi), CIT v. Stellar InvestmentsLtdl92ITR287(Del.)& CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263(SC) and contended that the appellant duly discharged the initial burden to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness by submitting necessary documentary evidences in respect of the share application money. Reliance is also placed…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Jaguar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd

ITA/530/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

…arge of onus. 12.7. Other cases where the issue of share application money received by an assessee was examined in the context of Section 68 are CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. [CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd., 2006 SCC OnLine Del 1624 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 : (2007) 158 Taxman 440] and CIT v. Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. [CIT v. Value Capital Services (P) Ltd., 2008 SCC OnLine Del 1474 : (2008) 307 ITR 334] 13. The principles which emerge where sums of money are credited as share capital/premium are: 13.1. The assessee is under a legal obligation to prove the genuineness of the transaction…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Jaguar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd

ITA/531/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

…arge of onus. 12.7. Other cases where the issue of share application money received by an assessee was examined in the context of Section 68 are CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. [CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd., 2006 SCC OnLine Del 1624 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 : (2007) 158 Taxman 440] and CIT v. Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. [CIT v. Value Capital Services (P) Ltd., 2008 SCC OnLine Del 1474 : (2008) 307 ITR 334] 13. The principles which emerge where sums of money are credited as share capital/premium are: 13.1. The assessee is under a legal obligation to prove the genuineness of the transaction…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. Bdr Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed alongwith pending applications, if any,

ITA/49/2025HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 68

…the CIT(A) and learned ITAT, we are not persuaded to interfere with such findings. The submissions of the revenue are unmerited. 20. We also find that the learned ITAT had relied upon the judgement of this Court in CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.; 299 ITR 268 (Del), and rightly so. 21. The judgement of the Supreme Court in NRA (supra) would not enure to the benefit of the revenue for the reason that, in the present case, as noted Digitally Signed By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:19.03.2025 12:06:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 49/2025 Page 23 of 23 above, the assessee has furnished not…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. Bdr Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed alongwith pending applications, if any,

ITA - 49 / 2025HC Delhi03 Mar 2025
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 68

…the CIT(A) and learned ITAT, we are not persuaded to interfere with such findings. The submissions of the revenue are unmerited. 20. We also find that the learned ITAT had relied upon the judgement of this Court in CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.; 299 ITR 268 (Del), and rightly so. 21. The judgement of the Supreme Court in NRA (supra) would not enure to the benefit of the revenue for the reason that, in the present case, as noted Digitally Signed By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:19.03.2025 12:06:53 Signature Not Verified ITA 49/2025 Page 23 of 23 above, the assessee has furnished not…

The Commissioner of I.T.-I, Hyderabad vs. M/S. Akash Cable Tv Network Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad

ITTA/253/2012HC Telangana18 Feb 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Pr. Commissioner Oflncome Tax Delhi - 5 vs. Mrs. Rowena Sharma

ITA/1220/2018HC Delhi11 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 80

…ge of onus. 12.7. Other cases where the issue of share application money received by an assessee was examined in the context of Section 68 are CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. [CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd., 2006 SCC OnLine Del 1624 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 : (2007) 158 Taxman 440] and CIT v. Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. [CIT v. Value Capital Services (P) Ltd., 2008 SCC OnLine Del 1474 : (2008) 307 ITR 334] 13. The principles which emerge where sums of money are credited as share capital/premium are: 13.1. The assessee is under a legal obligation to prove the genuineness of the transac…

Achla Malhotra, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-24(1), Delhi

ITA 4252/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…lders or that of the sub-creditors. If it had any doubts with regard to their creditworthiness, the Revenue could always bring it to lax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub creditors -CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ld. (2007)207 CTR (Del) 38 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) and CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195 : (2008) 6 DTR (SC) 308 relied on.” We may also recall that in the Case of CIT vs M/s Avant Grade Carpets Ltd Appeal no. 141 of 2014 dated 11.08.2014 the Honorable Allahabad High Court has held that; “On perusing the records, it appears that the finding that the assessee was rerout…

M/S Swift Vintrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT, Kolkata-1I, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1032/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri A. Kundu, CIT, DR
Section 143Section 148Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Swift Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. CIT, Kolkata-II, Kolkata. Janta Flat No. 99-Y, Block- E, situated at Jahagirpuri Vs. North West, Delhi, Pin- 110033 (PAN: AAMCS6460R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri A. Kundu, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 19.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 21.11.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the revision order of the Ld. Pr. Comm…

Heritage Hospitals Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

ITA 4090/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…an Farms Pvt Ltd(Del) ITA No. 71/2015 dated 12.08.2015. (e) CIT Vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt Ltd (Del)ITA No. 169 of 2017 dated 14.03.2017. (f) Earthmetal Electrical Pvt Ltd. (SC) SLP No. 21073 of 1999 dated 30.07.2010. (g) Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd 299 ITR 268(Del) (h) CIT Vs. Peoples General Hospital Ltd 356 ITR 65(MP). i) Dwarkadish Investment Pvt Ltd (Del)ITA No. 911 of 2010 (j) CIT Vs. Winstral Petrochemicals Pvt Ltd 330 ITR 603(Del). (k) CIT Vs. Value Capital Services Pvt Ltd 307 ITR 334(Del). 11. Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the ld. CIT(A). The ld DR vehemently argued that t…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Circle-2, Chandigarh vs. M.R.S. Shri Prannath Parnami Education Society, Haryana

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 253/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.253/Chd/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम M.R.S. Shri Prannath Income Tax, Exemptions, Parnami Education Society, Circle-2, 20Km Stone, Chandigarh Rajgarh Road, Vpo Choudhariwas Hisar 125001 "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aabam1046N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By :Sh. Kapil Goyal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2024 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per A.D. Jain: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 14.01.2024, For The Assessment Year 2017-18, Taking The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 133(6)

…899/Chd/2019 (Assessment Year: 2014-15), 2020 (6) TMI 129 iii) ‘CIT v. Orissa Corpn. (P.) Ltd.’, [1986] 25 Taxman 80F/159 ITR 8(SC); iv) ‘CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd., & Ors’. 361 ITR 220 (Del. HC); vi) ‘CIT v. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd.’, 2008 299 ITR 268 (Del. HC); vi) ‘CIT vs. Dwarkadhish Investment P. Ltd.’, [2011] 330 ITR 298 (Del. HC) vii) ‘DIT (Exemptions) vs. Keshav Social & Charitable Foundation’, [2005] 278 ITR 152 (Del. HC) which is affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 394 ITR 496 (SC). 253-Chd-2024 - M.R.S. Prannath Parnami Educational Society, Haryana 6 No rebuttal to suc…

Venkateshwara Wires Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Ao As Well As Before The Ld. Cit(A) As The Documents Submitted Was Only In Support Of Confirmations & Other Documents Already Submitted & No New Documents Were Submitted. 2. The Assessee Craves Your Indulgence To Add Amend Or Alter All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 801ASection 80I

…h arises. It cannot, therefore, be said that any question of law arose in these cases. The High Court was, therefore, right in refusing to refer the questions sought for. (12) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. DIVINE LEASING & FINANCE LTD – High Court of Delhi (299 ITR 268) Income—Cash credit—Share application money—Burden of proof can seldom be discharged to the hilt by the assessee—If the AO harbours doubts of the legitimacy of any subscription he is empowered, nay dutybound, to carryout thorough investigations—But if the AO fails to unearth any wrong or illegal dealings, he cannot obdurately adhere to his suspi…