Rathod Jewellers, Pune V. ITO, Ward 5(3), Pune

ITA 1611/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1167 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B C MALAKAR
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure; Document seized; Reason to believe; Documents seized
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 69; 148; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE , , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA , AM . / ITA NO S . 1611 TO 1614 /PN/20 1 3 / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 0 - 0 1 TO 20 03 - 04 RATHOD JEWELLERS, M/S. MZSK & ASSOCIATES, M/S. MZSK & ASSOCIATES, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, LEVEL 3, BUSINESS BAY, PLOT NO.84, WELLESLEY ROAD, NEAR RTO, PUNE 411001 . / APPELLANT PAN: AA FFR5463H VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3), PUNE . / RESPONDENT WARD 5(3), PUNE . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI NEELESH KHANDELWAL / RESPOND ENT BY : SHRI B.C. MALAKAR / DATE OF HEARING : 27 .0 8 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31 .0 8 .2015 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: ALL THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF CIT (A) - III , PUNE , DATED 2 3 . 0 7 .2013 RELATING T O ASSESSMENT YEAR S 200 0 - 0 1 TO 20 03 - 04 AGAINST RESPECTIVE ORDER S PASSED UNDER SECTION 1 4 3 (3) R.W.S. 14 7 OF THE INCOME TAX AGAINST RESPECTIVE ORDER S PASSED UNDER SECTION 1 4 3 (3) R.W.S. 14 7 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 2 2. THIS BUNCH OF FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE SAME ASSESSEE RELATING TO SAME ISSUE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AN D ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. OF CONVENIENCE. 3. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED IN ALL THE APPEALS IS AGAINST THE INVOKING OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AND CONSEQUENT RE - ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 14 3(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT. ALL THE FOUR APPEALS INVOLVE SAME ISSUE AND IN ORDER TO ADJUDICATE THE SAME, WE REFER TO THE FACTS IN ITA NO.1611/PN/2013 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000 - 01. 4 . THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 1611 /PN/201 3 HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GRO UNDS OF APPEAL : - 1. ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING IN THE CASE & AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW, IT BE HELD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED AND CONFIRMED BY THE 1 ST APPELLATE AUTHORITY BE CANCELLED IN INVOKI N G PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT . 2 . WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO . 1, ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING IN THE CASE & AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW, IT BE HELD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED AND CONFIRMED BY THE 1 ST APPELLATE AUTHORITY BE CANCELLED IN HOLDING & TAXING ALLEGED INVESTMENT & INTEREST INCOME THEREON IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT . THE APPELLANT FIRM DENIES ANY SUCH INVESTMENT & INTEREST INCOME THEREON. THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE 1 ST APPELLATE AUTHORITY BE CANCELLED ON THESE SCORES BE DELET ED . 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND 1 & 2 ABOVE, ON FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING IN THE CASE & AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW, IT BE HELD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED AND CONFIRMED BY THE 1 ST APPELLATE AUTHORITY BE CANCELLED IN TAXING ALLEGED INVESTM ENT & INTEREST INCOME THEREON IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT FIRM ON GUESSWORK & SURMISES WITHOUT ESTABLISHING OR FURNISHING ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THE ALLEGED INVESTMENT WAS MADE BY THE APPELLANT FIRM & INTEREST THEREON WAS EARNED BY THE FIRM. THE ASSE SSMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE 1 ST APPELLATE AUTHORITY BE CANCELLED BE HELD AS ERRONEOUS, UNJUSTIFIED & NOT TENABLE IN LAW & BE DIRECTED TO BE CANCELLED. UNJUSTIFIED & NOT TENABLE IN LAW & BE DIRECTED TO BE CANCELLED. 4. THE APPELLANT PRAYS TO BE ALLOWED TO ADD, AMEND, DELETE, MODIFY, RECTI FY ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 5 . BRIEFLY, IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD ORIGINALLY FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.10.2000 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.64,870/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM TH E ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE 2, PUNE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ADVANCED LOAN ON INTEREST TO DIFFERENT PERSONS THROUGH SHRI SHRIRAM SONI ASSESSEE HAD ADVANCED LOAN ON INTEREST TO DIFFERENT PERSONS THROUGH SHRI SHRIRAM SONI IN WHOSE CASE SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED ON 29.07.2003, IN WHICH VARIOUS PAPERS / DOCUMENTS WERE SEIZE D. ON THE BASIS OF THE AFORESAID PAPERS / ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 3 DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM THE PREMISES OF SHRI SHRIRAM SONI, INFORMATION WAS FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE 2, PUNE, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ADVANCED HIS UNACCOUNTED INCOME ON LOAN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIEW OF THE SAID INFORMATION, WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. CONSEQUENTLY, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 30.03.2007, WHICH WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAID DATE ITSELF I.E. 30.03.2007. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED RETURN OF INCOME ON 13.04.2007 DECLARING INCOME OF RS.64,870/ - . CONSEQUENT THERETO, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSE E ON 22.11.2007. THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR COPIES OF DOCUMENTS AND ALSO THE REASONS FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTES THAT THE PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM SHRI NARESH RATHOD VIDE AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 07.12.2007 DENIED THAT THE INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY THE ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE 2, PUNE BELONGS TO HIS FIRM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTING THE AFFIDAVIT TO BE NOTHING BUT A SELF DEFENCE TO AVOID THE TAXES, WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT DUG OUT BY THE DEPARTMENT THE TAXES, WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT DUG OUT BY THE DEPARTMENT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CONDUCTED O N SONI GROUP ON 29.07.2003, WAS REQUIRED TO BE TAXED UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED ITS STAND THAT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN MONE Y LENDING. ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED, THE UNACCOUNTED INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS WORKED OUT AT RS.14 LAKHS AND THE SAME WAS ADDED UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT. FURTHER, INTEREST EARNED ON UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT TOTALING RS.29,9 00/ - WAS ADDED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE LEGAL PLEA CHALLENGING THE INVOCATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. THE W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE REPRODUCED BY THE CIT(A) AT PAGES 5 TO 8 UNDER PARA 4 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER. FURTHER, WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON LEGAL GROUNDS WERE FILED WHICH ARE REPRODUCED IN PARA 4.1 AT PAGES 8 AND 9 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER, WHICH ARE BEING REFERRED TO BUT ARE NOT BEING REPRODUCED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVIT Y. THE CIT(A) THEREAFTER, DELIBERATED UPON ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 4 THE NATURE OF DOCUMENTS SEIZED AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT AND OBSERVED THAT ON THE BASIS OF SEIZED DOCUMENTS, WHERE ACTION IS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT HELD AS UNDER: - UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT HELD AS UNDER: - 4.6 . SEC . 153C CLEARLY REQUIRES (A) S E IZURE OF MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABL E ARTIC L E OR THINGS OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR DOCUMENTS (B) SATISFACTION OF THE ASSES S ING O FF ICER THAT SUCH SEIZED DOCUMENTS ETC. BELONGS TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE SEA RCHED PERSON AND (C) SUCH DOCUMENTS, ASSETS ETC. SHALL BE HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE OTHER PERSON WHO WI L L BE NOTICED U/S 153C. ONE OF THE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT IN SEC . 153C THAT THE ASSET OR DOCUMENT SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED DURING SEARCH BE LONGS TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE SEARCHED PERSON. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE SEIZED DOCUMENT UNDISPUTEDLY IS THE COMPUTER GENERATED CHECK LIST FOR THE PERIOD 12.2.2000 TO 30.6.2001 (BUNDLE NO. 99) AND THE CASH BOOK FOR THE PERIOD 2 . 9.2000 TO 30.6.2001 (BUNDLE NO . 100) WHICH WAS FOUND AND SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ACTION ON SHRI SHRIRAM SONI AND OTHERS . THE IMPUGNED SEIZED PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS CANNOT BE SAID SHRIRAM SONI AND OTHERS . THE IMPUGNED SEIZED PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS CANNOT BE SAID TO BE BELONGING TO THE APPEL L ANT BUT BELONGED TO SHRI SHRIRAM SONI IN WHOSE PREMISES THE DOCUMEN TS WERE FOUND A ND SEIZED AND WHICH WAS UTILIZED BY SHRI SONI FOR MAINTAINING A RECORD OF HIS BROKERAGE AND MONEY LEND I NG ACTIVITIES . AC C ORDINGLY , IT IS HELD FROM THE FACTS OF PRESENT CASE , T HE PUNE ITA T' S DECISION IN PUNJA BI G R OUP O F C A SES ARE FACTUALL Y DI F FE R EN T A N D NO RELIANCE CAN BE ON THE SAME . S I MPLY BECAUSE THE INFORMATION I N THE FORM OF LEDGER ACCOUNT EXTRACTS F R OM THE SEIZED BUNDLE NUMBERS 99 AND 100 WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R , IT CANNOT BE HELD AS CONTENDED BY THE APPELLANT THAT THE IMPU GNED DOCUMENTS ' BELONG ' TO THE APPE L LANT . IT CANNO T ALSO BE INFERRED AS CONTENDED BY THE APPELLANT THAT NO ACTION U/S 148 COULD HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SINCE THE INFORMATION 'BELONGED ' TO THE APPELLANT . IN FACT TH I S STAND OF THE APP ELLANT IS IN COMPLETE JUXTAPOSITION TO HIS STAND AS PER THE AFFIDAVIT FILED DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, A COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN FILED DURING THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS THAT THE NAME MENTIONED IN THE SEIZED DOCUMENT IS NOT HIS AND HE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS THAT THE NAME MENTIONED IN THE SEIZED DOCUMENT IS NOT HIS AND HE HAS NOT MADE ANY UNACC OUNTED INVESTMENT IN MONEY LEND I NG. BY TAKING THE STAND THAT THE INFORMATION BELONGS TO THE APPELLANT , HE IS INDIRECTLY ADMI T TING THAT THE UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT HAS INDEED BEING MADE. BE THAT AS IT MAY, FOR THE REASONS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE SEIZED MATERIAL IN THE FORM OF LEDGER EXTRACTS CONTAINING THE APPELLANT ' S NAME CANNOT BE HELD TO BE BELONGING TO THE APPELLANT AND THEREFORE , MERELY CONSTITUTES ' INFORMATION ' AS HELD BY THE VARIOUS COURTS FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 R . W.S. 147 . IN FACT IT IS A MORE PRUDE NT APPROACH BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ISSUE OR TO INITIATE ACTION U/S 147 IN SUCH CASES WHERE HE HAS REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR . IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE RECORD THAT THE APPELLANT HAS N EVER CONTESTED THE REOPENED ASSESSMENT AT ASSESSMENT STAGE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER . ON THE CONTRARY, ALL THE CONDITIONS RELEVANT TO THE COMPLETION OF 147 PROCEEDINGS ARE SEEN TO BE SATISFIED BOTH FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE APPELLANT WHO HAS DULY FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 13 . 04.2007 IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED U/S 148. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.1 FAILS. TO THE NOTICES ISSUED U/S 148. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.1 FAILS. 7. THE CIT(A) ALSO DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERITS. 8. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED BEFORE US IS AGAINST THE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S. 148 OF THE ACT. 9. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET POINTED 9. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET POINTED OUT THAT DESPITE SEVERAL REQUESTS, THE EXACT REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 5 ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE AC T HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. ANOTHER PLEA RAISED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE DOCUMENTS AS TO THE COMPLIANCE TO SECTION 151 OF THE ACT WERE ALSO NOT HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) CLAIMED THAT IT HAD NOT RECEIVED THE AFORESAID REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. 10. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE ON THE OTHER HAND, DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO THE CONTENTS OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER POINTED OUT THAT THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT WERE FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND EVEN THE DOCUMENTS THEREON WERE SHOWN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT IN ANY CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD PARTICIPATED IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND AT THIS JUNCTURE IT COULD NOT RAISE THE ISSUE AS TO NON - RECEIPT OF T HE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT. 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS IN RELATION TO THE APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AND CONSEQUENT RE - ASSESSME NT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RECEIVED CERTAIN INFORMATION FROM ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE 2, PUNE AFTER SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIONS WERE CARRIED OUT UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT ON THE PREMISES OF SHRI SHRIRAM SONI ON 29.07.2003. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT WERE ATTRACTED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER, ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE FOR COMPLYING WITH THE SAME. IN RESPONSE THERETO, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED RETURN OF INCOME D ECLARING SAME INCOME AS WAS ORIGINALLY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUESTED FOR THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 6 THE ACT AND ALSO THE COPIES OF DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON TO ALLEGE THAT THERE WAS ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE PERUS AL OF ASSESSMENT ORDER REFLECTS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD CONFRONTED THE ASSESSEE WITH THE FACT THAT INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE 2, PUNE , OF INVESTMENT IN MONEY LENDING BUSINESS, WHICH WAS UNACCOUNTED FOR. BOTH BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAD ASKED FOR THE ISSUE OF VERBATIM COPY OF REASONS RECORDED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF APPLICATION DATED 20.04.2007 HAD REQUESTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ISSUE THE COPY OF REASO NS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. THE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER IS PLACED AT PAGE 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK. AT PAGE 2 OF THE PAPER BOOK, THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 22.11.2007 IS ATTA CHED, IN WHICH THE SUBJECT IS THE REASON FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT AND IT IS MENTIONED AS UNDER: - THE INFORMATION IS RECEIVED FROM THE ADDL.CIT, CENTRAL RANGE 2, PUNE THAT YOU HAVE INVESTED AT LEAST RS.16 LAKHS IN MONEY LENDING A S ON 31/3/2000, WHICH WERE UNACCOUNTED. HOWEVER, AS THE UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT WAS OUT OF THE ESCAPE INCOME UNACCOUNTED. HOWEVER, AS THE UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT WAS OUT OF THE ESCAPE INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX AS WELL AS INTEREST EARNED THEREON PERTAINS TO A.Y. 2000 - 01, NOTICE U/S.148 WAS ISSUED. IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR I.E. FOR A.Y.2001 - 02, A.Y. 2002 - 03 AND A.Y. 2003 - 04 THE INTEREST EARNED ON THESE UNACCOUNTED INCOME WERE REMAINED TO TAXED I.E. ESCAPED FROM ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, NOTICES U/S 148 WERE ISSUED. 12. THE ASSESSEE THEREAFTER, WROTE ANOTHER LETTER DATED 07.12.2007 TO THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGES 3 AND 4 OF THE PAPER BOOK, IN WHICH IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ALLEGATIONS STATED IN THE REASONS RECORDED , WERE DENIED. AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE PARTNER SHRI NARE SH RATHOD WAS ALSO FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGES 5 AND 6 OF THE PAPER BOOK. SIMILAR PLEA FOR REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT WAS ALSO MADE BEFORE THE CIT(A), WHO IN TURN, FO RWARDED THE SAME TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR REMAND REPORT. THE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER IS ENCLOSED AT PAGES 7 AND 8 OF THE PAPER BOOK. VIDE LETTER DATED 13.09.2011, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS TO ISSUE TH E VERBATIM COPY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 7 SECTION 148 O F THE ACT AS VIDE LETTER DATED 22.11.2007, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ONLY COMMUNICATED THE REASONS FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT AND NOT THE VERBATIM FORMAT. THE ASS ESSEE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US HAS FURNISHED AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE EFFECT THAT IT HAD RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER INTIMATING THE REASONS FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, THE VERBATIM COPY OF THE R EASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WAS NEVER SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE. 13. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT, WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REASON TO BELIEVE, THAT ANY INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, F OR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR, THEN HE MAY SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 148 TO 153 , ASSESS OR RE - ASSESS SUCH ESCAPED INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH ANY OTHER INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX WHICH COMES TO HIS NOTICE SUBSEQUENTLY IN THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS. FURTHER, UNDER THE PROVISO TO SECTION ITSELF, THE TIME LIMIT FOR RESORTING TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT ARE PROVIDED. THE REQUIREMENT OF THE SECTION THUS, IS FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT ANY INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND FOR SUCH A BELIEF, IT IS THE REQUIREMENT OF THE SECTION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RECORD REASONS FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT , P URSUANT THERETO, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO SERVE A NOTICE UPON THE ASSESSEE REQUIRING HIM TO FURNISH RETURN OF INCOME WITHIN SUCH PERIOD AS MAY BE SPECIFIED IN THE SAID NOTICE, UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE AFTER FURNISHING THE RETURN OF INCOME IS ENTITLED TO APPLY FOR THE COPY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSME NT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT ON RECEIPT OF INFORMATION PURSUANT TO SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIONS IN THE CASE OF SHRI SHRIRAM SONI, REASONS WERE RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AND CONSEQUENT THERETO, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE RETURN OF INCOME, WHICH THE ASSESSEE ADMITTEDLY DID. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR THE COPY OF REASONS RECORDED UND ER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE LETTER DATED 22.11.2007 ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 8 INTIMATED THE REASONS FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT, BUT DID NOT FURNISH THE VERBATIM COPY OF REASONS RECORDED BY HIM FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT. THE MAIN OBJECTION OF THE ASS ESSEE BEFORE US IS NON - SUPPLY OF VERBATIM COPY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT. 14. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN GKN DRIVESHAFTS (INDIA) LTD. VS. ITO AND OTHERS (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) HAS HELD AS UNDER: - WHEN A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961, IS ISSUED, THE PROPER COURSE OF ACTION FOR THE NOTICE IS TO FILE THE RETURN AND, IF HE SO DESIRES, TO SEEK REASONS FOR ISSUING THE NOTICES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BOUND TO FURNISH REASONS WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME. ON RECEI PT OF REASONS, THE NOTICE IS ENTITLED TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BOUND TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER. 15. THE SAID PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT WAS APPLIED BY MUMBAI BE NCH OF TRIBUNAL IN TATA INTERNATIONAL LTD. VS. DCIT (2012) 23 TAXMANN.COM 18 (MUM.) , ON WHICH THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON. RELIED UPON. 16. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER PLACED RELIANCE ON T HE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. (2012) 340 ITR 66 (BOM) . HOWEVER, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY STATED THAT ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD BE MET , IN CASE THE MATTER IS RESTOR ED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTION TO ISSUE THE VERBATIM COPY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE CONCESSION OF THE ASSESSEE, WE REMIT BACK THE ISSUE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER W ITH DIRECTION TO GIVE VERBATIM COPY OF REASONS RECORDED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER, TO ADJUDICATE THE OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST SUCH REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ADJUDI CATE THE ISSUE RAISED ON MERITS AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO S. 1611 TO 1614 /PN/2013 RATHOD JEWELLERS 9 17. THE FACTS AND ISSUES IN ITA NO S . 1612 /PN/201 3 TO 1614 /PN/201 3 A RE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS AND ISSUES IN ITA NO. 1611 /PN/201 3 AND OUR DECISION IN ITA NO. 1611 /PN/201 3 SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO ITA NO S . 1612/PN/2013 TO 1614/PN/2013. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 31 ST DAY AUGUST , 201 5 . SD/ - SD/ - (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; D ATED : 31 ST A UGUST, 2015. GCVSR GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (A) - III , PU NE ; 4. / THE CIT - III , PUNE ; 5. , , / DR B , ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE