Ita/407/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Faridabad v. M/S Srajan Buildtech Pvt Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. ITA4072014 (O&M)Date of decision:19.03.2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad ..Appellant Versus. M/s Srajan Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent CORAMHONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEHON5BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SAANDHAWALI Present: Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate,for the appellant. ee S.J. VAZIFDAR, A.C.J. (QRAL) CM5606CI]2014 This is an application for condoning 344 days’ delay in re-filingthe appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay of 344days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. Disposed of. ITA4()2()1 This is an appeal against the order dated 22.02.2013 of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing the appellant's appeal against theorder of the CIT (Appeals). The assessment pertains to the assessment year2006-2007. The respondent has two share holders. The issued subscribed and paid up capital isL1 lac.450 lacs were advanced by seven companies|by|chequesas|thesharecapital.TheA.O. issued.under Section 133(6) and sought information regarding the advancesaggregating to450 lacs. The A.O. came to the conclusion that these were|mere accommodation entries. [It was contended before us that these wereamounts that belonged to the respondent/assessee and were routed back to notice oOThe CIT (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunalhave come to the conclusion against the appellant. It is observed for instancethere was no material that established that the entries were mereaccommodation entries. They relied upon the written confirmations of theseven companies alongwith the PAN and bank statements and the fact thatpayments had been made through cheques. On the other hand, the appellantrelies upon the fact that some of these seven companies had not responded tothe notice. 3The matter, therefore, turns essentially on facts. The CIT.(Appeals) and the ITAT relied upon the relevant material. They did not relyupon irrelevant facts in coming to the conclusion. No question of law, therefore, arises. The findings cannot beSaid to be perverse. 4The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. 19.03.2015Amodh (S.J. VAZIFDAR)ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) |JUDGE|