Smt N.Sula, Kollam V. DCIT, Kollam

CO 19/COCH/2006

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7588 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-08-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2006
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A S BINCHU
• Assessee Lawyers: C B M WARRIER
• Keywords: Gift; Search and seizure; Peak credit; Block assessment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JM AND B.R.BASKAR AN, AM I.T.(SS)A. NO. 187 /COCH/2005 BLOCK PERIOD : 01-04-1996 TO 28-05-2002 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM. VS. SMT. SULA JAYAKUMAR, SABARIGIRI, ANCHAL, KOLLAM. [PAN:AGKPS 7230C] (REVENUE-APPELLANT) (ASSESSEE- RESPONDENT) C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 (ARSG. OUT OF I.T.(SS)A. NO. 187 /COCH/2005) BLOCK PERIOD : 01-04-1996 TO 28-05-2002 SMT. SULA JAYAKUMAR, SABARIGIRI, ANCHAL, KOLLAM. [PAN:AGKPS 7230C] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM. (ASSESSEE-APPELLANT) (REVENUE- RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY SMT. A.S. BINCHU, SR.DR ASSESSEE BY SHRI C.B.M. WARRIER, CA DATE OF HEARING 22/08/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14/09/2012 O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECT ION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10-08-2005 PASSED BY LD CIT (A)-1, KOCHI AND THEY RELATE TO THE BLOCK PERIOD ENDING 28-05-2002. 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE CASE ARE STATED IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE IS THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF A TRUST NAMED M/S SABARIGIRI TRUST. THE SAID TRUST RUNS A HIGH SCHOOL AT A PLACE CALLED ANCHAL. THE ASSESSEE IS OPERATING A B OARDING HOSTEL FOR THE STUDENTS OF A RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL RUN BY A SOCIETY NAMED M/S SABAR IGIRI EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL I.T.(SS)A. NO.187 /COCH/2005 & C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 2 SOCIETY. THE SAID SOCIETY IS MANAGED BY HER HUSBAN D SHRI V.K.JAYAKUMAR. THE DEPARTMENT CARRIED OUT SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION S IN THE HANDS OF SHRI V.K.JAYAKUMAR. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, CERTAI N INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSEE HEREIN WERE SEIZED. CON SEQUENTLY, A NOTICE U/S 158BC R.W.S. 158BD WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 12.12.2002. SI NCE THE BLOCK PERIOD WAS WRONGLY MENTIONED IN THE SAID NOTICE AS 1.4.96 TO 18.6.02 , A CORRIGENDUM WAS ISSUED ON 8.8.03 CORRECTING THE BLOCK PERIOD AS 1.4.96 TO 28.5.02. THE DATE 28.5.02 IS THE DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF THE SEARCH AND THE DATE 18.6.02 IS THE DATE OF CONCLUSION OF SEARCH. 3. THE ASSESSEE FILED HER BLOCK RETURN ON 19.6. 03 DECLARING AN UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.11,90,580/-. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED CASH FLOW STATEMENTS EXPLAINING VARIOUS INVESTMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED HER REGULAR RE TURNS OF INCOME RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 TO 2001-02 PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. THE RETURNS OF INCOME RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 WAS FILED SUBSEQUENT TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. THE AO DETERMINED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME A T RS.29,05,113/- IN THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING BY MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE SAID ADDITIONS BEFORE LD CIT(A) AND GOT PARTIAL RELIEF. HENCE BOTH THE PARTIES ARE IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE ISSUES DECIDED AGAINST EACH OF THE M. 4. WE SHALL TAKE UP THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REV ENUE, WHEREIN THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE LD CIT(A) ON THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS ARE BEING DISP UTED. (A) CASH FROM BOARDING HOSTEL - RS.5,31,755/- (B) CHITTY RECEIPTS - RS. 89,192/- (C) MARRIAGE GIFTS - RS.1,00,000/- (D) INTEREST ACCRUED ON BANK DEPOSITS - RS.1 ,97,713/- (E) PEAK INVESTMENT IN SAVINGS BANK - RS.14 ,82,089/- (F) INVESTMENT IN GOKULAM CHIT FUNDS. (G) APPLICABILITY OF SURCHARGE TO BE LEV IED U/S 113 OF THE ACT. 5. THE FIRST ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE RELATES TO THE DELETION OF RS.5,31,755/- RELATING TO THE CASH RECEIVED FROM BOARDING HOSTEL. IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN WITHDRAWALS OF CASH FROM THE BOO K OF BOARDING HOSTEL. THE AO HELD THAT THE FOLLOWING WITHDRAWALS COULD NOT BE EX PLAINED WITH REFERENCE TO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND TREATED THE SAME AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. I.T.(SS)A. NO.187 /COCH/2005 & C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 3 1997-98 1,00,743 1998-99 2,27,500 1999-00 2,03,512 ----------- TOTAL 5,31,755 ====== BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE PROVED THAT THES E WITHDRAWALS ARE REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ALSO SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEE TS FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURNS OF INCOME OF THE RESPECTIVE YEARS. THE LD CIT(A) VERI FIED THE RELEVANT BALANCE SHEETS AND NOTICED THAT THE AO HAS NOT PROPERLY EXAMINED THE R ECORD. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD CIT(A) DID NOT FIND ANY REASON TO TREAT THE ABOVE SAID SUM S AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. IT IS A WELL SETTLED THAT THE UNDISCLOSED IN COME UNDER CHAPTER XIV-B OF THE ACT HAS TO BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF SEARCH MATERIALS. I T IS ALSO WELL SETTLED THAT ANY INCOME WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN EITHER RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR OTHERWISE DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH CANNO T BE TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF AN ASSESSEE. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A CLEAR FINDING THAT THE ABOVE SAID WITHDRAWALS HAVE BEEN DECLARED IN THE BA LANCE SHEETS FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURNS OF INCOME, WHICH WERE FILED PRIOR TO THE DA TE OF SEARCH. HENCE, IN OUR VIEW, THE LD CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE SAID WITHDRAWALS CANNOT BE TREATED AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. THE NEXT ISSUE RELATES TO THE ADDITION OF RS .89,192/- RELATING TO CHITTY RECEIPTS. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN THE ABOVE SAID CHITTY RECEIP T IN THE CASH FLOW RELATING TO THE YEAR ENDING 31.3.99. THE AO TREATED THE SAME AS TH E UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCE D TO PROVE THE SAID RECEIPT. HOWEVER, THE LD CIT(A) NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D DECLARED THE CHIT FUND CONTRIBUTIONS AND THE RECEIPTS IN HER CAPITAL ACCOU NT FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000. SI NCE THE RELEVANT CHITTY TRANSACTIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT PRIO R TO THE DATE OF SEARCH, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN DELETING THIS ADDITION. I.T.(SS)A. NO.187 /COCH/2005 & C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 4 8. THE NEXT ISSUE RELATES TO THE ENHANCEMENT OF RE LIEF RELATING TO MARRIAGE GIFTS BY RS.1.00 LAKH. IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FILED FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.3.2002, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN GIFT RECEIPTS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 4,77,500/- ON THE OCCASION OF MARRIAGE OF HER DAUGHTER NAMED SMT. DIVYA. THE AO CONSIDERED THE GIFT AMOUNT AS EXCESSIVE AND ACCORDINGLY ACCEPTED A SUM OF RS.1.00 LAKH ONLY AS RECEIPT OF MARRIAGE GIFTS. ACCORDINGLY THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.3,77,500/- WAS TREATED AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD CIT(A) ENHANCED THE ACCEPTABLE AMOUNT OF GIFT TO RS.2.00 LAKHS AND ACCORDINGLY SUSTAINED THE ADDITIO N TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2,77,500/-. 9. BEFORE US AS WELL AS BEFORE LD CIT(A), THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO WANTED CONFIRMATION FOR BIGGER AMOUNTS OF GIFTS ONLY AND A CCORDINGLY, A DETAILED LIST SHOWING THE NAME, ADDRESS AND AMOUNT WAS DULY FURNISHED BEF ORE THE AO. HOWEVER, THE AO HAS MADE A DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,77,500/- AND THE LD CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED THE SAID DISALLOWANCE TO RS.2,77,500/-. IT IS TO BE NOTED H ERE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS SEEKING DELETION OF THIS ADDITION ALSO IN THE CROSS OBJECTI ON FILED BY HER. 10. THE RECEIPT OF DONATIONS ON THE OCCASION OF M ARRIAGE IS NOT DENIED. THE ISSUE PERTAINS TO THE QUANTUM OF RECEIPT. THE ASSESSEE H AS CLAIMED A SUM OF RS.4,77,500/- AS GIFT RECEIPTS. THE AO HAS RESTRICTED THE SAME T O RS.1.00 LAKH AND THE LD CIT(A) HAS ENHANCED IT TO RS.2.00 LAKHS. IN THE PAPER BOOK FI LED BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF DONORS AND ALSO CONFIRMATI ON LETTERS OBTAINED FROM SOME OF THE DONORS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT OBTAIN THE C ONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM ALL THE DONORS. HENCE, ON A CONSPECTUS OF THE MATTER, WE A RE OF THE VIEW THAT IT WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE IF THE GIFT AMOUNT IS DETERMINE D AT RS.3,50,000/-. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) IS MODIFIED TO THE EXTENT STATED ABOVE. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO RESTRICT THE ADDITION ON THIS ISSUE TO RS.1,27,500/-. THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HER CROSS OBJECTION ON THIS ISSUE I S ALSO DISPOSED OF IN TERMS OF THE DISCUSSIONS MADE ABOVE. 11. THE NEXT ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE RE LATES TO THE ADDITION OF RS.1,97,713/- PERTAINING TO THE INTEREST ACCRUED ON BANK DEPOSITS . THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 A ND FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2002 TO I.T.(SS)A. NO.187 /COCH/2005 & C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 5 28.5.2002 (DATE OF SEARCH) SUBSEQUENT TO THE DATE O F SEARCH. THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST ACCRUED ON THE DEPO SITS MADE BY HER IN THOSE RETURNS. SINCE THE RETURNS OF INCOME REFERRED ABOVE WERE FIL ED AFTER THE DATE OF SEARCH, THE INTEREST INCOME DECLARED THEREIN AMOUNTING TO RS.1, 97,713/- WAS TREATED AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD CIT(A) DELETED THE SAID ADDITION BY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. NITI N MUNJE (2003)(185 CTR (MP) 255) AND AMARNATH AGGARWAL VS. DCIT (67 TTJ (DEL) 551). 12. WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN REGULAR LY DECLARING THE INTEREST ACCRUED ON DEPOSITS EVEN IN THE RETURNS OF INCOME FILED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH, MEANING THEREBY, THE RELEVANT DEPOSITS STAND ALREADY DISCLO SED TO THE DEPARTMENT. IN THAT FACTUAL SITUATION, IN OUR VIEW, THE AO CANNOT CONSI DER THE INTEREST ACCRUED DURING THE YEAR ENDING 31.3.2002 AND ALSO FROM 1.4.2002 TO 28. 5.2002 SOLELY ON THE GROUND THAT THE RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE ABOVE SAID PERIODS WE RE FILED SUBSEQUENT TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LD CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE. 13. THE NEXT ISSUE RELATES TO THE ADDITION OF R S.14,82,089/- PERTAINING TO PEAK DEPOSITS FOUND IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNTS. THE A SSESSEE REFLECTED THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY HER IN THE CASH FLOW STATEME NTS. THE AO NOTICED THAT SOME OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS ARE NOT REFLECTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HER CASH FLOW STATEMENTS. ACCORDINGLY HE TREATED THE PEAK CREDITS FOUND IN TH E FOLLOWING BANK ACCOUNTS AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. (A) FEDERAL BANK A/C NO.2223 (B) IOB A/C NO.2610 (C) KOLLAM DIST. CO-OP BANK A/C NO.9044 (D) SBT, ANCHAL A/C NO.10438 (E) ANCHAL SERVICE CO-OP BANK A/C NO.7126. BEFORE LD CIT(A), IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE BANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED WITH KOLLAM DIST. CO-OP BANK AND ANCHAL SERVICE CO-OP BANK ACTU ALLY BELONG TO SABARIGIRI TRUST AND THEY HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE OTHER THREE BANK ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN REFLECTED BY THE ASSE SSEE IN HER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ALSO IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENTS. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD CIT(A) HELD THAT THERE IS NO I.T.(SS)A. NO.187 /COCH/2005 & C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 6 NECESSITY TO WORK OUT THE PEAK CREDIT WHEN THESE AC COUNTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT. 14. ON A PERUSAL OF PARAGRAPH (10.A) OF THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER, WE NOTICE THAT THE AO HIMSELF HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSE D THE TOTAL DEPOSITS (RS.6,59,609/-) AND TOTAL WITHDRAWALS (RS.6,96,246/-) MADE/DRAWN FR OM THE FEDERAL BANK (A/C NO.2223) IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENTS. STILL THE AO HAS CONSIDERED THE PEAK CREDIT AMOUNT OF RS.4,34,246/- IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY DISCLOSED THE TRANSACTIONS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS TO THE DEPARTMENT, THERE IS NO NECESSITY T O CONSIDER THE PEAK CREDIT ALONE FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES. THE LD CIT(A) HAS ALSO GIVEN CLEAR FINDING THAT THE TWO BANK ACCOUNTS REFERRED SUPRA ACTUALLY BELONG TO M/S SAB ARIGIRI TRUST AND HENCE THE SAID BANK ACCOUNTS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSESSMENT IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE AGREE WITH THE DECISION REACHED BY LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 15. THE NEXT ISSUE RELATES TO THE ADDITION PERT AINING TO SUBSCRIPTIONS MADE IN CHITTYS OF GOKULAM CHIT FUND. THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF R S.14,23,024/- PERTAINING TO THE SUBSCRIPTIONS MADE IN GOKULAM CHITTY. THE ASSESSE E CONTENDED BEFORE THE AO THAT THESE CHITTIES WERE SUBSCRIBED BY M/S SABARIGIRI TR UST AND THEY HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE TRUST ACCOUNT DID NOT CONTAIN THE CHITTY ACCOUNT NUMBER AND ACCORDINGLY HELD THAT THE IMPUGNED SUBSCRIPTIONS COULD NOT BE CORRELATED IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ACCOUNT NUM BERS. ACCORDINGLY HE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.14,233,024/- RELATING TO CHITTY SUBS CRIPTIONS. BEFORE LD CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FILED EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HER CLAIM TH AT THESE CHITTIES BELONG TO M/S SABARIGIRI TRUST. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD CIT(A) DIREC TED THE AO TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND RECOMPUTED THE ADDITION AFTER EXCLUDIN G THE CHITTIES WHICH WERE ALREADY DISCLOSED EITHER BY THE ASSESSEE OR HER HUSBAND OR THE TRUST. BEFORE US, THE DEPARTMENT IS CONTENDING THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO, WHICH HE IS NOT ENTITLED TO DO. I.T.(SS)A. NO.187 /COCH/2005 & C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 7 16. THERE CANNOT BE ANY DISPUTE THAT THE INCOME ALREADY DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT SHALL NOT FORM PART OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. TECHNIC ALLY, THE ACTION OF LD CIT(A) MAY BE WRONG, HOWEVER, WE NOTICE THAT THE AO HAS ALSO MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WITH OUT MAKING PROPER VERIFICATION, SIMPLY BECAUSE CERTAIN DETAILS ARE MISSING IN THE NARRATION RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. UNDER THESE CIRC UMSTANCES, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE COULD BE ALLOWED, PROVIDED SOME BODY HAD E XAMINED THE SAID CLAIM. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE AO TO EXAMINE THE CLAIMS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W. 17. THE LAST ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE RELATES TO THE LEVYING OF SURCHARGE U/S 113 OF THE ACT. THE LD CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE SURC HARGE BY HOLDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.113 SHALL HAVE PROSPECTIVE OPERATION. HOWEV ER, THIS ISSUE HAS SINCE BEEN SETTLED BY HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SURESH N GU PTA (297 ITR 322), WHERE IN IT IS HELD THAT THE SURCHARGE IS LEVIABLE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 18. NOW WE SHALL TAKE UP THE CROSS OBJECTION FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN GROUNDS NUMBERED AS 1 TO 6, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED VARIOUS LEGAL GROUNDS. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THE SAID LEGAL ISSUES AND WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN HIS DECISION ON THEM. ACCORDINGLY, WE REJECT ALL THE LEGAL GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 19. IN GROUND NUMBER 7, THE ASSESSEE IS ASSAILIN G THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.20,000/- PERTAINING T O LIC SURVIVAL BENEFITS. IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN A RECEIPT OF RS.20,000/- AS THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM LIC ON THE INSURANCE POLICY. HOWEVER , THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY DOCUMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE SAID CLAIM. HENCE T HE AO TREATED THE ABOVE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.20,000/- AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME. BEFORE US ALSO, THE ASSESSEE H AS FILED COPIES OF LETTER RECEIVED FROM LIC AND ALSO A COPY OF RELEVANT CHEQUE LEAF. ACCORDING TO LD A.R, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE SAID DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE AO. SINCE THE AO HAS TAKEN A STAND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF RE CEIPT OF LIC AMOUNT OF RS.20,000/-, I.T.(SS)A. NO.187 /COCH/2005 & C.O. NO. 19/COCH/2006 8 WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE N EEDS TO BE EXAMINED AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE US. ACCORDINGLY, W E SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF DOCUMENTS FIL ED BEFORE US AND ALSO IN THE LIGHT OF ANY OTHER DOCUMENT THAT MAY BE FILED BY THE ASSESSE E BEFORE HIM AND TAKE APPROPRIATE DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 20. THE LAST ISSUE IN THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE MARRIAGE GIFTS. THIS GROUND HAS ALREADY BEEN DISPOSED OF BY US WHILE DEALING WITH THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 21. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AN D THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPO SES. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 14-09- 2012 SD/- SD/- (N.R.S.GANESAN) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: KOCHI DATED: 14TH SEPTEMBER, 2012 GJ COPY TO: 1. SHRI C.B.M. WARRIER, WARRIER & WARRIER, CHARTERE D ACCOUNTANTS, SEA SIDE, NORTH BEACH ROAD, CALICUT. 2.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM. 3.THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CI RCLE, KOLLAM. 4.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-I, KOCHI. 5.THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL, KOCHI. 6. D.R., I.T.A.T., COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN. 7. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) I.T.A.T, COCHIN