Mr.Anant Ganesh Gadgil, V. ACIT Central Circle 1(2),

ITA 1464/PUN/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7681 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A S SINGH
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR (JM) AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO (AM) ITA NO. 1 464 /PN/200 8 ( ASSTT. YEAR : 200 6 - 07 ) M R. ANANT GANESH GADGIL , 693, NARAYAN PETH, PUNE 411 030 PAN A GJPG0103F .. APPELLANT V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), PUNE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.R. BHAGWAT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.S. SINGH ORDER PER I.C. SUDHIR J M THE ASSESSEE HAS QUESTIONED FIRST APPELLATE ORDER ON THE GROUND THAT THE LD CIT(A ) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF : 1) RS. 1,43,550/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH AS UNEXPLAINED CASH U/S. 69A OF THE ACT ; 2) RS. 7,42,280/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN GOLD ORNAMENTS. G ROUND NO. 1 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE A.O MADE ADDITION OF RS.1,43,550/ - U/S. 69A OF THE ACT IN THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153 OF THE ACT. THE SAME HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE LD CIT(A). THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE WERE SEARCHED. AT THAT TIME, THE ASSESSE WAS ABROAD, HENCE HIS STATEMENTS COULD NOT BE RECORDED U/S. 132(4). THE A.O HAS DISCUSSED THE RELEVANT FACT IN PARA NO.5 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. AS PER WHICH, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, TOTAL CASH AMOUNT OF RS. 1,43,550/ - WAS FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE/2 LOCKERS OF THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 2 AMOUNT. CASH OF RS. 38,400/ - WAS FOUND IN 2 LOCKERS WITH BANK OF INDIA AND CASH OF RS. 1,05,000/ - WAS FOUND AT TH E RESIDENCE DURING SEARCH. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE REMAINED THAT THE ENTIRE FAMILY STAYS TOGETHER AS AN UNIT AND ALL THE FAMILY MEMBERS ARE INCOME - TAX ASSESSEES. THESE MEMBERS WERE NAMED AS MR. A.G. GADGIL (ASSESSEE), MR. V.A. GADGIL, MRS. VAISHA LI GADGIL, MR. S A URABH GADGIL AND MRS. RADHIKA GADGIL. IT WAS ALSO PONTED OUT THAT TWO SENIOR LADY MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY MRS. KAMAL GADGIL, THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE AND MRS. MAL A TIBAI KANITKAR, WIDOWED SISTER OF THE ASSESSEE WHO ARE DECEASED WERE ALSO PART OF THE FAMILY FOR SOME DURATION IN THE BLOCK PERIOD AND AS THEY WERE WEALTH TAX ASSESSEES IN THEIR OWN RIGHT, THEIR CASH AND ORNAMENTS ARE ALSO CONSIDERED IN THE EXPLANATION. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE FAMILY MEMBERS WERE FILING WEALTH TAX RETURNS TILL A.Y. 1988 - 89 AND 1990 - 91 AND WERE SHOWING CASH IN HAND AS THEIR PERSONAL HOUSEHOLD CASH WHICH WAS EXPLAINED BY MRS. VAISHALI GADGIL IN HER STATEMENTS U/S. 132(4). THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED PERSONWISE DETAILS AS UNDER : MRS. VAISHALI GADGIL RS. 6500/ - MRS. KAMAL GADGIL RS. 6000/ - MR. A.G. GADGIL (HUF) RS. 16000/ - SMT.MALATI KANITKAR RS. 10000/ - MR.A.G. GADGIL (INDL.) RS. 10000/ - TOTAL : RS. 48,500 THUS, MRS. VAISHALI GADGIL CLARIFIED THAT CASH FOUND IN LOCKERS TO THE TUNE OF RS . 38,400/ - (RS. 31,900 + RS. 6500) WAS PART OF THE CASH DECLARED IN WEALTH TAX RETURNS. 3. ABOUT THE CASH FOUND OF RS. 1,05,000/ - , IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT IT REPRESENTS SAVINGS ACCUMULATED OVER SEVERAL YEARS OUT OF THE HEAVY ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 3 CASH WITHDRAWALS BY THE PARTNERS FOR ALL THESE YEARS. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT DURING PERIOD 1.4.2005 TO 25.10.2005 ITSELF, THE FOLLOWING PERSONS HAVE WITHDRAWN CASH FROM THE FIRM A UNDER WHICH IS REFLECTED IN THEIR CAPITAL ACOUNT : MR. A.G. GADGIL RS. 1,48,000 MR. V.A. GADG I L RS. 1,49,600 MR. SAURABH GADGIL RS. 20000 RS. 317600/ - IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS CASH WAS AVAILABLE PURELY FOR PERSONAL EXPENSES. THE OTHER OUTGOING EXPENSES LIKE ELECTRICITY BILLS, TELEPHONE BILLS, MUNICIPAL TAXES ETC., ARE SEPARATELY ACCOUN TED FOR IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF EACH PARTNER. FURTHER, SIMILAR WITHDRAWALS HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS OF THE BLOCK PERIOD ALSO AND TAKING ALL THESE FACTS INTO CONSIDERATION, THE BALANCE CASH OF RS. 1,05,000/ - FOUND WAS EXTREMELY REASONA BLE AND DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED AS EXPLAINED. REGARDING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF CASH OF RS. 38,400/ - FOUND IN THE LOCKER THAT IT WAS PART OF CASH AMOUNT DECLARED IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURNS OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS, THE A.O OBSERVED THAT IT IS NOT FULLY VERIFIABLE. HE NOTED FURTHER THAT THE ASSESSEE AND MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY FAILED TO SUBMIT CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR ANY OF THESE YEARS UNDER CONSIDRATION. NO CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET FOR ANY OF THE YEARS BY ANY MEMBER OF THE FAMILY HAS BEEN FURNISHED, THUS IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO VERIFY EXACT POSITION OF CASH IN HAND ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. THE A.O NOTED FURTHER THAT THE WITHDRAWAL FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESEE COMMENSURATE WITH THE STANDARD OF LIVING AND STATUS OF THE AS SESSEE AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY SAVING OUT OF THE SAME IS REMOTE. HE NOTED FURTHER THAT NO DETAILS/EVIDENCE THEREOF HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED BY THE ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 4 ASSESSEE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE A.O HELD T H AT THE EXPLANATION REGARDING CASH AMOUNT OF RS. 1,43,550 / - FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IS NOT AT ALL VERIFIABLE, HENCE CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. 4. THE LD CIT(A) HAS UPGHELD THIS FINDING OF THE A.O AFFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,43,550/ - 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS PARTNER IN T WO FIRMS, IN JEWELLERY BUSINESS. HE IS AN AGED PERSON. HE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE AND HIS JOINT FAMILY CUMULATIVELY PAY INCOME - TAX OF RS. 25,00,000/ - EVERY YEAR. THUS, THERE WAS EVERY POS SIBILITY OF RETAINING CASH AT THEIR RESIDENCE TO MEET OUT MEDICAL EMERGENCY AS WELL. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THEIR ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME IS SHARE OF PROFIT FROM FIRMS AND SOME INVESTMENT INCOME. NONE OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS HAS INCOME FROM ANY PROPRIETARY BUSINESS OF THEIR OWN. THE LD.A.R. REFERRED PAGE NO. 1 TO 3 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. SUMMARY OF WITHDRAWALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS FROM THEIR CAPITAL ACCOUNTS WITH M/S. P.N. GADGIL AND COMPANY FOR A.YS. 2004 - 0 5 AND 2006 - 07. HE ALSO REFERRED PAGE NOS. 4 TO 37 OF THE PAPER BOOK I.E. EXTRACTS OF CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. V.N. GADGIL AND COMPANY FOR A.YS. 2004 - 05 TO 20 - 6 - 07. 6. THE LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND TRI ED TO JUSTIFY THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ON THE ISSUE. 7. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO IMPROVE ITS CASE EVEN BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. AS THE CASH OF RS. ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 5 38,400/ - FOUND IN THE BANK LOCKERS WAS NOT VERIFIABLE WITH REFERENCE TO ANY EVIDENCE TO ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID CASH WAS PART OF CASH BALANCE DECLARED IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURNS AS CERIFIED BY MRS. VAISHALI GADGIL. SIMILARLY, THE EXPLANATION REGARDING BALANCE CASH OF RS.1,05,000 / - IS ALSO NOT ACCEPTABLE. IN ABSENCE OF CASH FLOW STATEMENTS FOR ANY OF THESE YEARS AND CAPITAL ACCOUNT OR BALANCE SHEET FOR THE A.Y. UNDER CONSIDERATION , THE LD. CIT(A) IN OUR VIEW HAS RIGHTLY AGREED WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE A.O THAT IN ABSENCE OF SUCH EVIDENCE, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO VERIFY THE EXACT POSTION OF CASH IN HAND ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. WE THUS ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER ON THE ISSUE. THE SAME IS UPHELD. THE GROUND NO. 1 IS ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. GROU ND NO.2 8. THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT JEWELLERY WORTH RS. 32,18,821/ - WAS FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE A.O HAS NOTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD IN PARA NO. 6 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. FOR A READY REFERENCE, THE SAID EXPLANATION BEFORE THE A.O IS BEING REPRODUCED HEREUNDER : 1. FOLLOWING VALUABLES WERE FOUND AT THE PREMISES OF GADGIL FAMILY, THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER SR. NO. NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE FOUND J EWELLERY (RS.) GOLD : SILVER 1 KASTUBH,2131,VIJAYANAGAR COLONY, SADASHIV PETH, PUNE RS.32,18,821/ - RS.3,10,723/ - ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 6 SD/ - (D.N. PARAKH) DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), PUNE PLEASE EXPLAIN THE SOURCES OF ACQUISITION OF THE ABOVE ASSETS/VALUABLES WITH NECESSARY DETAILS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, IF OWNED BY YOU. PLEASE NOTE THAT IF YOU FAIL TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCES OF INVESTMENT IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED ASSETS, IT WILL BE TREATED AS UNE XPLAINED INVESTMENT AND WILL BE TAXED ACCORDINGLY. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE MADE A WRITTEN SUBMISSION, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER - GO L D JEWELLERY : - IN ADDITION TO CASH, GOLD AND SILVER ORNAMENTS AND ARTICLES WERE FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE WHOSE SUMMARY IS AS UNDER : - GOLD ORNAMENTS 4379.03GMS SILVER ARTICLES UTENSILS ETC 34.769 KG. AGAINST THIS MRS. VAISHALI GADGIL HAS EXPLAINED IN HER STATEMENT U/S.132(4) THE FAMILY HOLDING AS PER WEALTH TAX RETURNS AS FOLLOWS : - SR NO. NAME OF THE PERSON GOLD IN GMS. AS PER WEALTH TAX RETURN SILVER IN KG. AS PER WEALTH TAX RETURN REMARKS GROSS NET WEIGHT WEIGHT 1 MRS.VAISHALI GADGIL 940.000 :799.000 1.00 AS PER WEALTH TAX STATEMENT ON 31.03 .1990 2 MRS.KAMAL GADGIL 1600 .000 1360.000 8.57 EXPIRED IN THE 2003 3 MRS.MALTI KANITKAR 720.000 612.000 2.00 EXPIRED IN THE 2003 4 MR.A.G. GADGIL(HUF) 206.000 175.000 15.00 5 SAURABH GADGIL 275 .000 234.000 2.71 6 A.G.GADGIL (INDL.) 54.000 46.000 7.10 7 V.A.GADGIL 100.000 85,000 0 8 MRS.VAISHALI GADGIL 1168.000 1100.00 TOTAL 5063.000 411.000 36.38 ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 7 * M RS. VAISHALI GADGIL HAD STATED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH THAT HER HOLDING OF GOLD ORNAMENTS WAS 870 GMS. WHILE ACTUALLY AS PER HER WEALTH TAX RETURN IT IS 940 GMS. WHICH IS CONSIDERED IN THE ABOVE SUBMISSION. YOU MAY NOTE THAT MRS. VAISHALI GADGIL PURCHASED PURE GOLD OF 1100GMS. VIDE BILL NO. 22548 & 22549 DTD. 21.06.2005 FROM M/S. P.N. GADGIL & CO. AND COVERTED THE SAME INTO GOLD ORNAMENTS WEIGHING APPROX. 1168 GMS IMMEDIATEL THEREAFTER. THE WORK WAS DONE BY KARAGIRS ATTACHED TO M/S. P.N. GADGIL & CO. WH O DID NOT CHARGE THEIR LABOUR CHARGES AS IT WAS THE HOUSEHOLD WORK OF GADGIL FAMILY ITSELF. THE VALUE OF THE GOLD IS DEBITED TO THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF MR. V.A. GADGIL AS WILL BESEEN FROM THE EXTRACT SUBMITTED ON RECORD. TAKING ALL THESE FACTS INTO ACCOU NT THE TOTAL HOLDING OF THE FAMILY OF GOLD AS WELL AS SILVER IS FULLY EXPLAINED AND NO ADDITION ON THAT ACCOUNT IS CALLED FOR. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DTD 05.12.2007 THAT, THE TOTAL NET QUANTITY OF GOLD ORNAMENTS FOUND HAS BEEN SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED ON THE BASIS OF WEALTH TAX RETURNS AND PURCHASE BILLS. THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE OBJECTS TO ANY ADDITION BEING MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT. IT AT ALL YOUR HONOUR IS STILL INCLINED TO REJECT ANY PART OF THE ASSESSEES AFORESAID EXPLAN ATION AND MAKE SOME ADDITION, THE SAME MAY BE MADE IN THE CASE OF A G GADGIL AS HEAD OF THE FAMILY. 9. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE EXPLANATION, THE A.O CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE DIFFERENCE IN QUANTITY OF JEWELLERY FOUND AND SOURCE THEREOF COMES TO 106 8.03 GMS. HE VALUED IT AT RS. 7,42,280/ - (AT THE RATE OF RS. 695/ - PER GRAM) AS MENTIONED IN THE INVENTORY OF JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING EXCESS JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ALSO R EMAINED THAT MRS. VAISHALI GADGIL, WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED PURE GOLD OF 1100 GMS. O N 21.6.2005 FROM M/S. P.N. GADGIL & CO. VIDE BILL NO. 22548 AND 22549 WHICH WAS CONVERTED INTO ORNAMENTS. THE A.O DID NOT ACCEPT THIS EXPLANTION WITH THIS OBSER VATION THAT ON VERIFICATION OF RECORD, NO SUCH CLAIM OF PURCHASE OF PURE GOLD HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE N OR ANY MEMBER OF THE FAMILY IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH TALKED ABOUT IT . NO SUCH ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 8 EVIDENCE LIKE ORIGINAL BILL/COPY THEREO F WAS FOUND AND/OR SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DID NOT PRODUCE THE SAID EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ADIT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OR POST SEARCH ENQUIRIES. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MENTION ANY SPECIFIC REASON AS TO WHY THE SAID DIFFEREN CE COULD NOT BE RECONCILED AND WHY THE SAID EVIDENCE COULD NOT BE PRODUCED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS, OBSERVED THE A.O. THE A.O OBSERVED FURTHER THAT THE SAID PURE GOLD AS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PURCHASED FROM THE FAMILY CONCERNS OF THE ASSESS EE AND ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REASON FOR NOT MAKNG ANY PAYMENT TO THE KARAGIRS WHO CONVERTED THE SAID PURE GOLD INTO ORNAMENTS. NO DETAILS/EVIDENCES AS REGARD TO TYPE OF ORNAMENTS MADE FROM THE SAID PURE GOLD AND WHETHER THE SAID PURE ORNAMENTS ARE A CTUALLY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WAS GIVEN. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE A.O. DID NOT FIND THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AS SATISFACTORY. HE HAS ACCORDINGLY TREATED THE SAID INVESTMENT OF RS. 7,42,280/ - IN GOLD ORNAMENT S AS UNEXPLAINED AND ADDED THE AMOUNT TO THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE BEING HEAD OF THE FAMILY. THE LD CIT(A) HAS UPHELD THE ADDITION. 10. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE PERSONS IN THE FAMILY WERE POSSESSING GOLD ORNAMENTS OF AROUND 3200 GRAMS. THEY HAVE ALSO FILED THEIR WEALTH TAX RETURNS UPTO A.Y. 1990 - 91. THE LD. A.R. ALSO REFERRED PAGE NO. 1, 14, 38 AND 39 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. AT PAGE NO.1, HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE DETAILS OF DRAWINGS OF THE A.G. G ADGIL FAMILY FOR THE A.Y. 2006 - 07 SHOWING WITHDRAWAL OF RS. 7,01,041/ - BY SHRI V.A. GADGIL, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASES OF GOLD. AT PAGE NO. 14, HAS BEEN SHOWN LEDGER ACCOUNT OF GADGIL VIDYADHAR ANAND BETWEEN 1.4.2005 AND 31.3.2006 IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE FIRM. IN THIS LEDGER ACCOUNT, DEBIT OF ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 9 RS. 7,01,041/ - HAS BEEN SHOWN AGAINST G. GADGIL VAISHALI IN THE MONTH OF JUNE (APPEARED TO BE 21) 2005. AT PAGE NO. 38, HAS BEEN PLACED THE SALES BILL ISSUED BY THE FIRM PURSHOTHAM NARAYAN GADGIL & COMPANY DT. 21 ST JUNE 2005 IN THE NAME OF GADGIL VAISHALI FOR THE PURCHASE OF BULLION 99.9, 800 GMS. FOR RS.5,09,848/ - . AT PAGE NO. 39, IS AGAIN BILL ISSUED BY THE SAID FIRM ON 21.6.2005 IN THE NAME OF GADGIL VAISHALI AGAINST THE PURCHASE OF BULLION 99.9, 300 GRAMS FOR RS. 1,91,193/ - . 11. THE LD D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 12. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN VIEW OF ABOVE SUBMISSION, WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ARGUMENT WAS ADVANCED BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) THAT THE EXCESS JEWELLERY IS OUT OF 1100 GRAM OF PURE GOLD PURCHASED FROM M/S. PURSHOTHAM NARAYAN GADGIL & CO. THE SAID EXPLANATION, IN OUR VIEW, IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AS THE LD CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY OBSERVED THAT IF THE SAID EXLANATION IS ACCEPTE D, IT WILL REQUIRE ANOTHER PRESUMTION THAT THE ENTIRE UNACCOUNTED ASSETS HAVE BEEN DETECTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. IT IS SO EVEN IF WE ACCEPT THE SUBMISION OF THE LD. A.R. THAT MAKING CHARGES OF GOLD ORNAMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN DEBITED IN THE ASSESSEE S ACCOUNT SINCE GOLDSMITHS WORKING IN THE SISTER CONCERN HAD VOLUNTERED THEIR EXPERTISE WITHOUT CHARGING. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO IMPROVE ITS CASE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE ISSUE, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTH ORITIES BELOW IN THIS REGARD. THE SAME IS UPHELD. THE ADDITION IS ACCORDINGLY AFFIRMED. CONSEQUENTLY, GROUND NO. 2 IS REJECTED. 13. IN RESULT, APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ITA NO 1464 /PN/200 8 ANANT G. GADGIL.. A.Y. 2006 - 07 PAGE OF 10 10 THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17TH JANUARY,2011 SD/ - SD/ - ( D. KARUNAKARA RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( I.C. SUDHIR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE , DATED THE 17 TH JANUARY , 20 1 1 US COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE A PPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT (CENTRAL), PUNE 4. THE CIT(A) - I , PUNE 5. THE D.R. B BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE