IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
               (DELHI BENCH `C' : NEW DELHI)

         BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                             and
          SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                        ITA No.3904/Del./2013
                      (Assessment Year : 2001-02)

M/s. Innobyte Systems (P) Ltd.,               vs.    ITO, Ward 11 (4),
1 F / 93, NIT                                        New Delhi.
FARIDABAD.

       (PAN : AAACI2229Q)

       (Appellant)                                   (Respondent)

                Assessee by : Shri K.V.S. Gupta, Advocate
                Revenue by : Shri Satpal Singh, Senior DR

                                        ORDER

PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

       This appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of CIT
(Appeals)-XV, New Delhi dated 22.12.2011.







2.     In this case, the Assessing Officer received an information from the
Investigation Wing that assessee has taken bogus accommodation entries. The
case was reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 after
recording the reasons. The Assessing Officer has also called information u/s
133(6) of the Act during the assessment proceedings wherein the bank has
confirmed the instrument number through which the accommodation entry was
provided by M/s. H.B. Relan and Coy. and credited to the assessee's account.
The assessee filed an appeal and the CIT (A) has confirmed the addition by
holding as under :-
                                         2                  ITA No.3904/Del/2013


       "7.5 Accordingly, since the appellant has not discharged the
     initial onus of proving the genuineness of the transaction with
     HB Relan and Co. and also in view of the fact that appellant is
     not engaged in the business of investment and financing and no
     details of share/securities sold through HB Relan and Co. were
     made available, hence in these circumstances I hold that the
     money received in appellant's bank account to the tune of
     Rs.10,11,210 is to be treated as unexplained credit and it calls for
     the addition under section 68 of the Act."






3.     We have heard both the sides on the issue. It was pleaded before us that
this company was taken over by present management in the year 2004. They
could not collect the copies of balance sheet, books of account and other
documents from the earlier management. It was also claimed before us that
material or evidences collected by Assessing Officer were not confronted to the
assessee with regard to the genuineness of transactions. After hearing both the
sides on the issue and considering the relevant material on record, we are of the
view that in the interest of justice and equity, this issue requires a relook at the
level of Assessing Officer wherein the assessee shall submit necessary
documents asked for. Accordingly, we restore this issue back to the file of the
Assessing Officer for deciding afresh after providing an opportunity of being
heard to the assessee.


4.     In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on this 15th day of September, 2014.



               Sd/-                                        sd/-
         (I.C. SUDHIR)                               (B.C. MEENA)
       JUDICIAL MEMBER                          ACCOUNTANT MEMBER


Dated the 15th day of September, 2014
TS
                               3   ITA No.3904/Del/2013




Copy forwarded to:
     1.Appellant
     2.Respondent
     3.CIT
     4.CIT(A)-XV, New Delhi.
     5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi.                 AR/ITAT