Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax - 17 v. Satish Chander Sikka
[Citation -2017-LL-1108-4]

Citation 2017-LL-1108-4
Appellant Name Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax - 17
Respondent Name Satish Chander Sikka
Court HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 08/11/2017
Assessment Year 2008-09
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags share application money • question of law • cash in hand • interest free advance • genuineness of transaction
Bot Summary: In this appeal, the Revenue questions an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal directing the deletion of total amount of 2,35,00,000/- brought to tax under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2008-09. According to the assessee, the amounts were borrowed from various individuals and entities for the purchase of property. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had enquired into these amounts; the assessee had provided the details and particulars of the entities who provided the cash. The ITAT in its impugned order was of the opinion that a proper ITA 948/2017 Page 1 appreciation of the circumstances especially the fact that the credits were confirmed by the entities who advanced them, could not have led to the conclusion that the income could be brought to tax under Section 68. The ITAT took note of the transactions for the previous assessment years, i.e., 2007-08, the cash in hand in question etc. This Court is of the opinion that the conclusions and findings of the ITAT are truly factual. This Court is satisfied that no question of law arises; the appeal is dismissed.


$ 33 * IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 948/2017, CM APPL.40192-40193/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 17 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus SATISH CHANDER SIKKA ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER % 08.11.2017 1. In this appeal, Revenue questions order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) directing deletion of total amount of `2,35,00,000/- brought to tax under Section 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2008-09. 2. According to assessee, amounts were borrowed from various individuals and entities for purchase of property. amounts were given by five companies/entities. During course of assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer had enquired into these amounts; assessee had provided details and particulars of entities who provided cash. AO doubted genuineness of transactions since advances were made not through regular documents but on plain paper and there was no interest charged. 3. ITAT in its impugned order was of opinion that proper ITA 948/2017 Page 1 appreciation of circumstances especially fact that credits were confirmed by entities who advanced them, could not have led to conclusion that income could be brought to tax under Section 68. In holding so, ITAT took note of transactions for previous assessment years, i.e., 2007-08, cash in hand in question etc. 4. This Court has considered grounds of appeal urged by Revenue and submissions of counsel. What was highlighted was that nature of transactions was dubious and what is more no interest was charged at time when amounts were paid. 5. This Court is of opinion that conclusions and findings of ITAT are truly factual. re-appreciation of evidence - unless it is shown that findings of Tribunal are unreasonable - is not warranted under Section 260A. Furthermore, decision of Supreme Court in CIT v. Lovely Exports, (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) is authority for proposition that assessee is not under any obligation to prove source of source of credit or share application money it receives. 6. This Court is, therefore, satisfied that no question of law arises; appeal is, therefore, dismissed. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J NOVEMBER 08, 2017/vikas/ ITA 948/2017 Page 2 Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax - 17 v. Satish Chander Sikka
Report Error