$~11-17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON: 10.07.2012 + ITA Nos.115, 116, 117, 118, 121, 123 & 124/2012 CIT ..... Appellant in all Appeals Through: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate for Appellant in all Appeals.

versus RL TRADERS .... Respondent in All Appeals Through: Mr. K.R. Manjani, Advocate for Respondent in all Appeals.

CORAM:

MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT)

% 1. Admit. The following substantial question of law arises in these batch of appeals i.e. whether the Tribunal’s approach in confirming the CIT’s order which had deleted the addition made on account of unsecured loans by the Assessing Officer, for the concerned assessment years i.e. 2000-01 to 2006-07 and the interest component, is correct, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee’s premises were searched on 13.12.2005, pursuant to which, a notice was issued under Section-153A on 09.07.2007 for the assessment years, 2000-01 to 2006-07. A detailed questionnaire was issued under Section-142 (1)/143 (2) on 29.10.2007. The assessee filed returns thereafter. The firm claimed to have ear