Vijay Vyas, Guwahati V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -03, Guwahati

ITA 154/GTY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8517 (ITAT-GUWAHATI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M HAOKIPJ DATEOFHEARING
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Reason to believe
• Section: 80C

Judgement Text

] \ ' \ ' , ' , IN THEINCOMETAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI BEFORE SHRIS.S.GODARA,JUDICIALMEMBER AND DR. A.L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANTMEMBER ITA NO. 154 / GAU / 2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012-13 VIJAY VYAS 6 TH FLOOR, ASAM ISPAT COMPLEX, N.S. ROAD, FATASHIL AMBARI, GUWAHATI- 781009 [ PAN NO.ABEPV 5739 Q ] V/S . DCIT, CIRCLE-3, 7 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, G.S. ROAD, CHRISTIAN BASTI, GUWAHATI-781005 \ ' /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT \ ' J /BYAPPELLANT NONE J /BYRESPONDENT SHRI M. HAOKIP,JCIT-DR ' _ /DATEOFHEARING 02-07-2019 /DATEOFPRONOUNCEMENT 10 - 07-2019 / ORDE R PERBENCH:- THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2 GUWAHATIS ORDER DATED 24.08.2016 PASSED IN CASE NO.GUWA-232/2015-16, INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 153AR.W.S144OFTHEINCOMETAXACT,1961;IN SHORTTHEACT. CASE CALLED TWICE. NONE APPEARS AT THE ASSESSEES BEHEST. WE THEREFORE PROCEED EX PARTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE INSTANT APPEAL IS TAKENUPFOR ADJUDICATIONON MERITS. ITA NO.154/GAU/2016 A.Y. 2012-13 VIJAY VYAS VS. DCIT, CIR-3, GAU PAGE2 2. THE ASSESSEES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE RELATING TO EXPENDITURE SEEKS TO REVERSE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION ADDING AN AMOUNT OF RS.16,47,199/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT MADE IN SHRI SALASAR INDUSTRIES. THE CIT(A)S DETAILED DISCUSSION CONFIRMED THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONREADSAS UNDER:- 3.GROUNDNO.1, 7AND 8 : THESE GROUNDS ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT MADE ANY SUBMISSIONS ON THESE GROUNDS DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING. HENCE, THESE ARE NOT BEING ADJUDICATED SEPARATELY. 4.GROUNDNO.2 AND3: THESE GROUNDSARENOT PRESSED.HENCE DISMISSED. 5.GROUNDNO.4: THIS GROUND PERTAINS TO DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.1,00,000/- U/S. 80C OF THE INCOMETAXACT, 1961FORWANTOFDOCUMENTARYEVIDENCE. 5.1 IN COURSE OF HEARING THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE ME THE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF PAYMENT OF LIP WITH A PRAYER FOR ADMISSION OF THESE DOCUMENTS AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. IN HIS REMAND REPORT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS STATED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION OF THE ADMISSION OF FRESHOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THESAMEWAS CONSIDERED TOBE RELEVANTFORDISPOSAL OF THE ISSUE. 5.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE ME AS WELL AS THE REMAND REPORT SENT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS STATED BY THE APPELLANT, I ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE NOW PRODUCED BEFORE ME AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, I ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS, THEREFORE, ALLOWED. 6.GROUNDNO.5: THIS GROUND PERTAINS TO DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION OF RS.15,000/- U/S 80D OF THE INCOMETAXACT, 1961FORWANTOFDOCUMENTARYEVIDENCE. 6.1 IN COURSE OF HEARING, THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE ME THE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF PAYMENT OF PREMIUM FOR MEDICLAIM INSURANCE WITH A PRAYER FOR ADMISSION OF THESE DOCUMENTS AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. IN THIS REMAND REPORT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT OFFERED ANY COMMENT ON THIS ISSUE. 6.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE ME AS WELL AS THE REMAND REPORT SENT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT OFFERED ANY COMMENT ON THIS ISSUE. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS STATED BY THE APPELLANT, I ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE NOW PRODUCED BEFORE ME AND AFTER CONSIDERING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, I ALLOW THE CLAIMOFTHEAPPELLANT. THIS GROUND OFAPPEAL IS,THEREFORE, ALLOWED. 7.GROUNDNO.6: THIS GROUND PERTAINS TO THE ADDITION OF RS.1,64,87,199/- IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AS UN-DISCLOSED INVESTMENT WITH SHRI SALASAR INDUSTRIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT IN COURSE OF SEARCH & SEIZURE OPERATION IN THE CASE OF M/S SMS SMELTERS LTD. ON 07.12.2012 THE BOA MARKED AS HD-4 (HARD DRIVE) WAS SEIZED. THIS SEIZED MATERIAL CONTAINED TALLY ACCOUNT NAMED AS SSI . THE AFORESAID SEIZED MATERIAL REVEALED CREDIT BALANCE OF RS.1,72,75,21\51/-0 IN THE SAME OF THE APPELLANT AS ON 31.03.20012. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER FOUND THAT IN THE PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT AS ON 31.03.2012, AN AMOUNT OF RS.7,88,052/- WAS SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD INVESTMENT IN SHRI SALASAR INDUSTRIES (SSI). SINCE NO EXPLANATION WAS FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.1,64,87,199/-(RS.1,72,75,251/-- RS.7,88,052/-) ASUN-DISCLOSED INVESTMENT OFTHE APPELLANT AND ADDEDTHESAME INHIS TOTAL INCOME. ITA NO.154/GAU/2016 A.Y. 2012-13 VIJAY VYAS VS. DCIT, CIR-3, GAU PAGE3 7.1 BEFORE ME THE APPELLANT VIDE HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 02.02.2016 HAS CONTENDED ASFOLLOWS: 5. GROUND NO.6: (ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT RS.1,64,87,199/- ) (I) WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADDED RS.1,64,87,199/- IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT. (II) THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH & SEIZURE OPERATIONS CONDUCTED AT THE OFFICE CUM FACTORY PREMISES OF M/S SMS SMELTERS LTD. AT LEKHI VILLAGES, NAHARLAGUN, ARUNACHAL PRADESH BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MARKED AS HD-4 (HARD DRIVE) WAS SEIZED VIDE ANNEXURE A TO THE PANCHANAMA DATED 07.12.2012 PREPARED AT THEIRS PLACE. THE AFORESAID SEIZED MATERIAL MARKED AS HD-4 CONTAINED A TALLY ACCOUNT NAMED SSI CONTAINING BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE FY 2011-12. IN THE AFORESAID SEIZED MATERIAL AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,72,75,251/- APPEARED AS CREDIT BALANCE IN THE NAMEOF THE APPELLANTAS ON31AST MARCH 2012. (III) THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT IN THE PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT AS ON 31.03.2012, AN AMOUNT OF RS.7,88,0523/- AS SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD INVESTMENT IN SHRI SALASAR INDUSTRIES. HE, THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYEXPLANATION FROM THE APPELLANT TREATEDTHIS BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.1,64,87,199/- AS UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT OF THE APPELLANT. (IV) IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE AFORESAID SEIZED MATERIAL WHICH WAS SEIZED FROM M/S SMS SMELTERS LTD., APPEARS TO BE COMBINED ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS GROUPS. THERE IS NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE THAT THE APPELLANT MADE THE ABOVE INVESTMENT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOTJUSTIFIEDINMAKING THEAFORESAID ADDITION. 7.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT. I HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE REMAND REPORT SENT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE APPELLANT APART FROM MAKING A GENERAL SUBMISSION THAT THE AFORESAID SEIZED MATERIAL HD-4 APPEARS TO BE A COMBINED ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS GROUPS AND THERE IS NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE TO THE EFFECT AND THAT THE APPELLANT MADE THE INVESTMENT AS SHOWN IN THE HD-4, HAS NOT MADE ANY SPECIFIC SUBMISSIONS TO CONTRADICT THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE APPELLANT IS A PARTNER IN SHRI SALASAR INDUSTRIES WHEREIN THE AMOUNT OF RS.1,72,75,251/- IS SHOWN CREDITED IN THE HD-4. THEREFORE, THERE IS EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.1,64,87,199/-, AS MENTIONED ABOVE, WAS THE APPELLANTS UN-DISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN SHRI SALASAR INDUSTRIES. SINCE NO SPECIFIC EXPLANATION CAME FROM THE APPELLANT EVEN DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, I CONFIRM THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL, ISTHEREFORE, DISMISSED. 3. IT IS THEREFORE CLEAR FROM A PERUSAL OF THE LOWER APPELLATE FINDINGS THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN SOURCE OF IMPUGNED INVESTMENTS MADE IN SHRI SALASAR INDUSTRIES. WE NOTICE THAT THE CIT(A) HAD ALSO CALLED FOR REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS REGARD AT ASSESSEES BEHEST WHEREIN HE FURTHER FAIL TO EXPLAIN SOURCE IN CORRESPONDING PROCEEDINGS. WE THEREFORE ITA NO.154/GAU/2016 A.Y. 2012-13 VIJAY VYAS VS. DCIT, CIR-3, GAU PAGE4 FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE CIT(A)S DETAILED FINDINGS AFFIRMING THE IMPUGNEDEXPENDITURE. 4. THISASSESSEESAPPEALISDISMISSED. ORDERPRONOUNCEDINTHEOPENCOURT 10/07/2019 SD/- SD/- ( ' ) ( ' ) ( A.L.SAINI) (S.S.GODARA) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) GUWAHATI, *DKP ' ' - 10/07 /201 9 ' \ / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1 . /ASSESSEE-SHRIRATAN SHARMA,6 TH FLOOR, FATASIL AMBARI,GUWAHATI-9 2. /REVENUE-DCIT, CIRCLE-3, R.NO.714, 7 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN,G.S. ROAD GUWAHATI-781005 3. - ' ] ] ' /CONCERNEDCIT GUWAHATI 4. ] ] - / CIT (A) GUWAHATI 5. ' ' ' , ] \ ' \ ' , ' ' / DR,ITAT,GUWAHATI 6. ' [ /GUARDFILE. BYORDER/ , /TRUECOPY/ SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY(ONTOUR) ] \ ' \ ' ,