SHRI RAJU P. MEHTA, CHENNAI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - ii (1), CHENNAI

ITA 168/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5915 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND MR ABANI KANTA NA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Depreciation; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure; Document seized; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Onus to prove; Retraction; Revised return; Documents seized; Set aside; Liquidation
• Section: 43; 48; 9(1); 9(1); 9(1); 13; 22; 153C

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A B ENCH, CHENNAI . , ! . , ! ' BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A NOS. 168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 1999-2000, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003 -04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) MR. RAJU P.MEHTA, 40, BARNABY ROAD, KILPAUK, CHENNAI-600 010. VS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE II(1), CHENNAI-600 034. PAN : AAFPM 1912N ( /APPELLANT) /RESPONDENT/ / APPELLANT BY : MR. D.ANAND, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR. ABANI KANTA NAYAK, CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 23.12.2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.02.2021 / O R D E R PER G.MANJUNATHA, AM: THIS BUNCH OF SIX APPEALS FILED BY ASSESSEE ARE DI RECTED AGAINST SEPARATE, BUT IDENTICAL ORDERS OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHENNAI, ALL DATED 29.11.2019 AND PERTAIN TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-20 00, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06. SINCE, FACTS ARE IDENTICAL AND ISSUES ARE COMMON, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS MORE OR LESS FILED COMMON GROU NDS OF APPEAL FOR ALL ASSESSMENT YEARS, THEREFORE, FOR TH E SAKE OF BREVITY, GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 2001-02 IN ITA NO.169/CHNY/2020 ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, IS WRONG, ILLEGAL AND OPPOSED TO FACT S OF THE INSTANT CASE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A)-19 OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE AO WHILE EXERCISING THE POWERS CONFERRED WITHIN HIM HAS FAIL ED TO APPRECIATE THE LEGAL POSITION THAT THE ADDITION IN THE CASE OF SEARCH ASSESSMENTS AND ESPECIALLY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C HAS TO BE MADE ONLY ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINAT ING MATERIAL. THE LEARNED CIT(A)-19 OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN PROCEEDINGS U/S 153C TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT IS RE STRICTED ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS IF AN Y ONLY. THEREFORE IN THE ABSENCE OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL THE SAME ASSESSMENT IS VITIATED IN LAW. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE RELIED ON T HE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED IN THE CASE OF DINESH M ME HTA TO ASSESS THE CLOSING STOCK AND RECEIVABLE IN THE HAND S OF THE APPELLANT IN SO FAR AS THE SAID ORDER IS AGAINST WE LL ESTABLISHED CANONS OF JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A)-19 ERRED IN ASSESSING THE CLO SING STOCK OF RS.464602/- AND RECEIVABLE OF RS.28,96,647/- OF M/S. VIKAS BEARINGS AND WIRES, OSTENSIBLE OWNED BY SHRI DINESH R,MEHTA, IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT BY DRAWING A DVERSE INFERENCE FROM THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER IN THE CASE OF DINESH R,MEHTA, 3 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 5. THE LEARNED CIT(A)-19 OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT AL THOUGH THE HONBLE ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 30.06.2017 HAD SE T ASIDE THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF DINESH R MEHTA, THE ISSUE OF OWNERSHIP OF VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES WHICH STANDS DETERMINED IN THE HANDS OF DINESH R.MEHTA BY THE FI RST APPELLATE AUTHORITIES WAS NOT THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE ITAT, 6. THE LEARNED CIT(A)-9 OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITIES IN THE CA SE OF DINESH R MEHTA DATED 20,05,2010 AND 24,06.2014 POINT OUT T O THE FACT THAT THE OSTENSIBLE OWNERSHIP OF M/S. VIKAS BE ARINGS AND WIRES IS WITH DINESH R MEHTA WHICH FACT REMAINS UND ISTURBED BY THE ORDERS OF THE LIAR DESPITE THE ASSESSMENT OR DERS BEING SET ASIDE. 7. THE LEARNED CIT(A)-19 OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT TH E SAID ASSESSING OFFICER OF DINESH R MEHTA OUGHT NOT TO HA VE ENTERTAINED THE ISSUE OF OWNERSHIP OF MIS. VIKAS BE ARINGS AND WIRES WHEN THE HONBLE ITAT HAS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNIT Y TO THE SAID APPELLANT ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PRODUCING EV IDENCES AND AS OBSERVED BY HONBLE ITAT IN PARA 5 OF THE SA ID ORDER DATED 30.06.2017 IN ITA 2418 TO 2424/MDS/2014. 8, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE CASH CREDIT OF RS.65,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT AS MONTHLY REMUNERATION RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT AS A EMPLOYEE OF BOMBAY HARDWARES SYNDICATE. 4 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 9. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ADDING A SUM OF RS.1 ,10,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT OF CAPITAL OF THE APPELLANT I N THE BOOKS OF M/S. VIKAS BEARINGS AND WIRES. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE EXTRACTED FROM ITA NO.169/CHNY/2020 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ARE T HAT ASSESSEE IS A PROPRIETOR OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING & W IRES ASSESSED TO TAX AND FILED RETURNS REGULARLY U/S. 13 9(1) OF THE ACT. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S.132 OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED ON 23.02.2005 IN THE CASE OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THE ASSESSEE BEING PART OF DINESH R MEHTA GROUP WAS ALSO SUBJECTED TO SEARCH OPERATION IN THE BUSINESS PREMI SES AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL PREMISES. DURING THE COURSE OF SEAR CH VARIOUS INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND AND SEIZED WHICH INDICATES UNACCOUNTED BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS OF MR. DINESH R M EHTA CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME & STYLE OF M/S. A&N ENGINEE RING COMPANY. FURTHER, INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND IN T HE FORM OF COMPUTER DATA RELATING TO FINANCIAL YEAR 2000-01 TO 2004-05 WAS RETRIEVED FROM SOFTWARE CALLED BUSY SOFTWARE, WHICH REVEALED HUGE TRANSACTIONS IN A FILE NAMED M/S. A& N ENGINEERING COMPANY. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, S TATEMENTS 5 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 WERE RECORDED FROM COMPUTER OPERATOR MRS.CHITRA AN D MANAGER OF DRM GROUP MR.BABU, WHICH ESTABLISHED TH E FACT THAT ENTITY M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY IS ONLY A PAPER CONCERN AND THAT ALL TRANSACTIONS OF SALES, PURCHAS ES, STOCKS AND RECEIVABLES CONTAINED IN THE COMPUTER DATA BELO NGED TO PROPRIETARY AND PARTNERSHIP CONCERNS CONTROLLED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ALSO REVEALED MODUS O PERANDI OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA IN TRANSACTING OUTSIDE BOOKS SUCH AS PURCHASE OF GOODS, PAYMENTS AGAINST PURCHASE AND SA LES OUTSIDE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. DURING THE COURSE OF SEAR CH, MR. DINESH R MEHTA ADMITTED AN AMOUNT OF RS 7.00 CRORES AS HIS UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR ALL ASSESSMENT YEARS COVERED UNDER SEARCH AND ACCEPTED OWNERSHIP OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERI NG COMPANY. MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS ALSO FILED APPLICAT ION BEFORE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CHENNAI AND SUCH APPLICATIO N WAS REJECTED DUE TO NON-PAYMENT OF TAXES. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH A STATEMENT U/S. 132(4) WAS RECORDED FROM M R. DINESH R MEHTA ON 23.02.2005, WHERE HE HAS STATED THAT HI S EMPLOYEES ARE PERSONS WHO ACTUALLY RECEIVED GOODS AND SELL THEM AND VALUE GIVEN BY THEM REPRESENT CORRECT AMO UNT OF 6 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 TRANSACTIONS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF VARIOUS CON CERNS MANAGED BY HIM. ACCORDINGLY, VALUE OF STOCK OF THR EE ENTITIES NAMELY M/S. VIKAS BEARING CORPORATION, CHENNAI, M/S . VIKAS SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS AND SPARES, CHENNAI AND M/S. VI KAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE, WAS TAKEN ON THE D ATE OF SURVEY. FURTHER MR. DINESH R MEHTA WHILE GIVING HI S OWN STATEMENT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH HAS ACCEPTED CLOSING STOCK FOUND IN THE PREMISES OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES BELONGS TO HIM AND NOT TO MR.RAJU P MEHTA, PROPRIET OR OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. 4. CONSEQUENT TO SEARCH, CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TAKEN UP FOR ASSESSMENT AND ACCORDINGLY NOTICES U/S.153C DATED 06.10.2006 WAS ISSUED . THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENG ED NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 153C BY FILING WRIT PETITION BEFORE H ONBLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS AND HONBLE HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER D ATED 11.12.2006 HAD DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PROVIDE COPIES OF CERTAIN STATEMENTS RECORDED FROM MR. DI NESH R MEHTA, WHICH WAS RELEVANT AND BASIS OF ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S,. 153C OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, ASSESSEE HAS FILED HI S RETURN OF 7 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 INCOME IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED U/S.153C ON 30 .03.2007 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF 1,15,833/-. THE CASE WAS TAKEN UP FOR SCRUTINY AND DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION GATHERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND POST-SEARCH INVESTI GATION CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT DATA CONTAINED IN COMPUTER F OUND AND SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY BELONGS TO MR.DINESH R MEHTA AND ACCORDINGLY, UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE FORM OF CLOS ING STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SURVEY AND RE CEIVABLES ARE REQUIRED TO BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF MR. D INESH R MEHTA. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO TAKEN SUPPO RT FROM STATEMENT RECORDED FROM MR. DINESH R MEHTA DURING T HE COURSE OF SEARCH AND POST-SEARCH INVESTIGATION, WHERE HE H AD CATEGORICALLY ADMITTED THAT CLOSING STOCK AND RECEI VABLES FOUND IN THE NAME OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COI MBATORE, IS IN FACT, BELONGS TO HIM AND TOTAL BUSINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF SAID FIRM IS IN FACT BELONGS TO HIM AND TOT AL BUSINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF FIRM IS IN FACT CARRIED OUT BY HIS EMPLOYEES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO TAKEN SU PPORT FROM 8 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 STATEMENT RECORDED FROM MR.BABU, AN EMPLOYEE OF DR M GROUP ON 23.02.2005, WHERE HE HAS CATEGORICALLY ADMITTED THAT DOCUMENTS FOUND IN THE NAME OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE IS CARRIED OUT UNDER INSTRUCTIONS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ALSO T AKEN SUPPORT FROM STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE RECORDED ON 25 .02.2005, WHERE HE HAS ADMITTED THAT HE HAS LENT HIS NAME TO MR. DINESH R MEHTA TO CARRYOUT BUSINESS IN THE NAME& STYLE OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, AND ALL TRANSACTIONS CARRIED O UT IN THE NAME OF SAID FIRM WAS DONE AS PER INSTRUCTIONS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF OPINIO N THAT UNACCOUNTED INCOME DETERMINED IN THE FORM OF CLOSIN G STOCK AND RECEIVABLES IS ASSESSABLE IN THE HANDS OF MR. D INESH R MEHTA AND ACCORDINGLY, MADE ADDITIONS ON SUBSTANTIV E BASIS IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. HOWEVER, SINCE ASS ESSEE IS OWNER OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, THE SAME UN ACCOUNTED INCOME BEING STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES HAS BEE N ADDED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. THE REL EVANT FINDINGS OF ASSESSING OFFICER ARE AS UNDER:- 9 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 3. UNACCOUNTED CLOSING STOCK: AS PER SALES TAX REG ISTRATION THE ASSESSEE HAD BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AT THE FOLLOWING P REMISES IN ADDITION TO SHOP NO- 2-, 814 BHARATHIAR ROAD, PN PA LAYAM COIMBATORE-3?. SHOP NO 1,814 BHARATHIAR ROAD PN PALAYAM, COIMBATORE-37 NO 705 LDAYAR STREET, COIMBATORE.-L HOWEVER IT IS NOTICED THAT HE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING OPERATIONS AT THE FOLLOWING ADDRESSES ALSO FIRST FLOOR, NO 24 DHANDAPANI STREET PN PALAYAM COIMBATORE-37 811 SARAVANA COMPLEX. RHARATHIAR ROAD! COIMBATORE- 37 IN COURSE OF SEARCH INVENTORY OF STOCK WAS TAKEN AN D THE STOCK WAS ALSO VALUED- SRI ORM WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE THE VALUE OF STOCK TO DERIVE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK. AS THERE WAS A DISCREPANCY IN THE VALUE PROVIDED BY SHRI DRM FOR T HE PURPOSE OF VALUATION, THE STOCK WAS VALUED BASED ON PRICE Q UOTED IN THE SALES QUOTATION. THE QUOTATIONS ARE NOTHING BUT SAL E BILL AS ADMITTED BY SHRI DRM AND HIS EMPLOYEES. THEREFORE, REJECTING THE PRICE ADOPTED BY SHRI DRM THE VALUE DERIVED FRO M QUOTATIONS IS ADOPTED TO DETERMINE THE STOCK VALUE. SHRI BABU, EMPLOYEE STATED THAT (QUESTION NO.32 AND 33 DATED 2 3.022005) THE GROSS PROFIT IS AROUND S TO 10%. THEREFORE FROM THE PRICE DETERMINED AS ABOVE 5% OF GROSS PROFIT IS REDUCED A ND THE BALANCE IS CONSIDERED AS CLOSING STOCK VALUE LYING AT VARIOUS PREMISES BELONGING TO VIKAS BEARING & WIRES. AS ALREADY DISCUSSED SHRI DRM IS THE OWNER OF VBW F OR ALL PURPOSE. THEREFORE THE STOCK LYING AT VARIOUS P REMISES OF M/S VIKAS BERING & WIRES, COIMBATORE IS TO BE HELD IN T HE HANDS OF SRI DRM THE ENTIRE STOCK CANNOT BE HELD TO HAVE BEE N ACCUMULATED IN THE YEAR ENDING 31.03-2005- THEREFOR E, IN THE ABSENCE OF PROPER STOCK ACCOUNTS FOR VARIOUS YEARS IN RESPECT OF UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS, THE VALUE OF UNACCOUNTED STOCK IS DERIVED AS UNDER AND THE SAME IS APPORTIONED TO VAR IOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS BASED ON THE PURCHASE VALUE CAPTUR ED FROM THE BOOKS OF A&NEC WHERE M/S VBW IS A DEBTOR- HOWEV ER, FOR THE FY 2004-05 IN RESPECT OF THE FICTITIOUS ENTITY SEARING 2004- 05 THERE IS NO PURCHASE DETAIL IS AVAILABLE. THEREF ORE THE 10 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 UNACCOUNTED SALES VALUE HAS BEEN CAPTURED FROM THE ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED IN COMPUTER FOR BEARING 2004-O5 - FROM THAT 5% OF GP MARGIN IS REDUCED TO DERIVE THE PURCHASE VALUE W ITH RESPECT TO BEARING 2004-05 ACCOUNT. BASED ON THE ABOVE PURC HASE VALUES RELATED TO VARIOUS FTS THE TOTAL VALUE OF U NACCOUNTED DOSING STOCK ALREADY DETERMINED AT RS 184,02,331,- IS APPORTIONED AND WORKED OUT AS UNDER: CLOSING STOCK OF MIS VIKAS BEARING & WIRES, COIMBAT ORE UPTO THE DATE OF SEARCH CLOSING STOCK BASED ON QUOTATION (SALE PRICE) - 2,2 4.76.420 LESS: GP AT THE RATE OF 5% AS STALED - - 11,23,821 CLOSING STOCK INCLUDING ACCOUNTED STOCK 2, 13,52,599 OPENING STOCK AS PER ACCOUNTS 37,22,888 ADD: PURCHASE ACCOUNTED 16,39,659 53,62,541 LESS: COST OF GOODS SOLD : SALES AS PER BOOK: 24,08,964 LESS: GP 15.899% 3,83,001 20 25,963 ACCOUNTED CLOSING STOCK AS ON DATE OF SEARCH 33, 36,578 ASS: CLOSING STOCK AS ON DATE OF SEARCH 46 4,856,168 UNACCOUNTED DOSING STOCK 2,46,89,177 UNACCOUNTED CLOSING STOCK IS APPORTIONED TO VARIOUS FINANCIAL YEARS: SOURCE OF DATEA UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE UNACCOUNTED CLOSING F.Y.2000-01 9,1 08,672 464.602 F.Y.2001-02 81.353.875 4149541 F.Y.2002-03 108 637 501 5541172 F.Y.2003-04 113,451,851 5,786733 F.Y.2004-05 87,551,711 4,465,669 BEARINGS 2004- 05 ACCTS SALES GP @ 5% 83,940,204 4281460 484,043,904 24,689,177 11 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 SHRI RPM ON THE ISSUE OF CLOSING STOCK AT VSW, COIM BATORE STATED VIDE LETTER DATED 27.03.2007 AS UNDER: CLOSING STOCK FOUND AT COIMBATORE : IN RESPONSE TO YOU QUERY REGARDING THE CLOSING STOCK FOUND AT THE OFFICE OF MIS VIKAS SEARING & WIRES COIMBATORE I WISH TO CLARIFY THAT S INCE I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FIRM NAMELY MIS VIKAS SEARIN G & WIRES COIMBATORE, EXCEPT HAVING LENT MY NAME, OUT OF TRUS T, THE DOSING STOCK FOUND AT THE SAID FIRM ALSO DOES NOT B ELONG TO ME. THIS FACT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY MY UNCLE MR. DINESH R MEHTA WHILE GIVING HIS OWN STATEMENT DURING THE SEARCH PR OCEEDINGS AND ALSO HIS ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT AND UNDUE INTEREST AND HASTE IN HAVING THE PROHIBITORY ORDER LIFTED FROM THE SAID C LOSING STOCK. THE VALUE OF THE CLOSING STOCK AT COIMBATORE WAS AL SO ARRIVED AT BY THE DEPARTMENT IN ACTIVE CONSULTATION WITH HIM A ND ONLY AFTER GETTING HIS APPROVAL AND CONFIRMATION MR DINESH R M EHTA THE ACTUAL OWNER OF THE SAID CLOSING STOCK WILL BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE PERSON TO ACCEPT THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE SAID CLOSING STOCK. AS THE OWNERSHIP IS HELD TO BE WITH SHRI DRM IT IS TAXED IN THE HANDS OF RPM AS A LEGAL OWNER ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. PROTE CTIVE 4,6460/- 4. UNACCOUNTED RECEIVABLES: DURING FY 2004-05 UNACC OUNTED TRANSACTIONS OF VBW WERE CARRIED OUT UNDER FICTITIO US ENTITY BEARING 2004-05. SRI DRM HIMSELF COMMITTED THAT FROM 14.200 4 HE HAS TAKEN OVER MIS VIKAS BEARING & WIRES. COIMBATORE. THE ACC OUNT OF BEARING 2004-05 MAINTAINED IN THE COMPUTER (A&NEC) HAS DETA ILS OF RECEIVABLE AMOUNTING TO RS 15,39291671-. THE SUM IN CLUDES AN AMOUNT OF RS 1387.23.9041- DUE FROM MIS VIKAS, CHEN NAI. IT IS VERIFIED THAT THE RECEIVABLES FOUND IN THE ACCOUNT OF BEARING 2004-05 IS NOT REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNT OF MIS A&NEC, AN AL LEGED ENTITY. THUS IT IS DEAR THAT THE RECEIVABLES IN THE ACCOUNT OF A &NEC IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FROM THE RECEIVABLES FOUND IN THE ACCOUNT BEARING 2004-05. THUS SRI DRM HAS TO EXPLAIN ON THIS. IN THE CASE O F THE ASSESSEE HE HAS BEEN THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE CONCERN MIS VSW. TH EREFORE THE ABOVE SUM IS TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON A PROTECTIVE BASIS. 12 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 HOWEVER, THE ENTIRE RECEIVABLE AMOUNT OF RS 15,3929,167/- CANNOT BE TREATED AS INCOME ACCUMULAT ED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE FY. 2004-05. IT HAS ALREADY BEEN DI SCUSSED THAT SRI DRM HAS BEEN OPERATING UNDISCLOSED BANK AC COUNT WITH CITY UNION BANK, COIMBATORE FROM DECEMBER 2000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF HIS TRADING ACTIVITIES UNDER THE ENTITY MIS VIKAS BEARING & WIRES. THE DATA UNDER BEARING 2004-05 DO ES NOT HAVE THE PURCHASE DETAIL. THEREFORE TO APPORTION TH E RECEIVABLES AMONG THE F.YS 2000-01 TO 2004-05, THE PURCHASE DATA GATHERED FROM LEDGER ACCOUNT OF MIS VIKAS BEAR ING 8 WIRES FOUND IN THE BOOKS OF MIS A&NEO. AND PURCTIAS E IN PROPORTION TO THE SALE ,ON A ESTIMATED BASIS, FOUND IN THE ACCOUNT OF BLEARING 2004-05 ARE CONSIDERED TO APPO RTION THE RECEIVABLE AMONG VARIOUS FYS. THE WORKING OF RECEIV ABLES ARE AS UNDER: UN ACCOUNTED RECEIVABLE AS PER BEARING 2004-05 AS ON 16.2.2005 (INCLUDES VIKAS CHENNAI OF 13,87,23,904/-) RS 15,39,29,167 F.Y SOURCE OF PURCHASE UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE UNACCOUNTED RECEIVABLES 2000-01 VBW IN A&N ENG ACCTS 9,108,762 2,896,647 2001-02 DO- 81353,875 25.871,070 2002-03 -DO I08.637501 34.547445 2003-04 -DO 113.451.851 36.078440 2004-05 -DO 87,551.711 27,642024 2004-05 BEARINGS 2004-05 ACCTS SALES- GP@ 5% 83,940,204 26,693,541 484,043,904 153,929,167 - 13 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 THE AMOUNT RECEIVABLE IS DETERMINED AT RS 28,96,647 /- AGAINST THE UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE OF RS 91,08,762/- FOUND IN MIS VIKAS BEARING & WIRES AS PER THE WORKING GIVEN ABOVE. THE ABOVE ADDITION BASED ON THE DISCUSSION ON OWNERSHIP OF VBW, IS TO BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF SHRI DRM. IT IS TAXE D IN THE HANDS OF RPM AS A LEGAL OWNER ON A PROTECTIVE BASIS. PROTECTIVE 28,96,647/- 5. BEING AGGRIEVED BY ASSESSMENT ORDER, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) . BEFORE LEA RNED CIT(A) ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED HIS SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFO RE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ARGUED THAT CLOSING STOCK F OUND AT COIMBATORE IN THE NAME OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE AND RECEIVABLE AS PER DATA FOUND IN C OMPUTER IS IN FACT BELONGS TO MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND HENCE SAM E CANNOT BE ADDED IN HIS HANDS ON PROTECTIVE BASIS, MORE PAR TICULARLY, WHEN THE SAME HAS BEEN ADDED ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS I N THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTH ER SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS LENT HIS NAME OUT OF TRUST TO MR. DINESH R MEHTA TO CARRY OUT BUSINESS IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, EXCEPT THIS, HE IS N OTHING TO DO WITH TRANSACTIONS CARRIED OUT BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS IN RESPECT OF CLOSING STOC K AND 14 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 RECEIVABLES FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THIS FACT HAS BEEN STRENGTHENED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND HIS EMP LOYEES WHERE THEY HAVE CATEGORICALLY ADMITTED THAT ALL TRA NSACTIONS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE WAS UNDER THE INSTRUCTIONS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND SHRI RAJU P MEHTA IS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRANSAC TIONS FOUND IN THE COMPUTER DATA IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N. ENGIN EERING & BEARING. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED CERTAIN ADDITI ONAL EVIDENCES INCLUDING STATEMENT RECORDED FROM MR. DIN ESH R MEHTA AND HIS EMPLOYEES TO DENY OWNERSHIP OF M/S. V IKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FORWARDE D ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY ASSESSEE TO THE ASSE SSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE REMAND REPORT DATED10.08.2017 HAS COMMENTED UPON EVIDENCE S FILED BY ASSESSEE AND ALSO REITERATED HIS OBSERVATIONS MADE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON THE BASIS OF VARIOUS INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH COUPLED WITH STATEMENTS RECORDED FROM MR. DINESH R MEHTA REGARDING OWNERSHIP OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIR ES. THE 15 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 LEARNED CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING RELEVANT SUBMISS IONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAS ALSO TAKEN NOTE OF VARIOUS EVIDEN CES COLLECTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH COUPLED WITH STATEMENT RECORDED FROM MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND HIS EMPLOYEES AND ALSO BY TAKING NOTE OF STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE MADE DURIN G THE COURSE OF SEARCH UPHELD THE ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSE SSING OFFICER ON PROTECTIVE BASIS TOWARDS UNACCOUNTED ST OCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH I N THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE, IN TH E HANDS OF ASSESSEE . THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO TAKEN SUPPO RT FROM ORDER OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA A ND CONSEQUENT ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY ASSESSING OF FICER U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 254 DATED 30.12.2011, WHERE THE A SSESSING OFFICER HAS EXCLUDED UNACCOUNTED STOCK AND RECEIVA BLES IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE, WHILE CONSIDERING ADDITIONS IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT PROTECTIVE ADDITION MAD E IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE TOWARDS UNACCOUNTED STOCK IN T RADE AND RECEIVABLES. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED C IT(A) ARE AS UNDER:- 16 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 6. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTS OF THE ASSESSME NT ORDER, THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED AND ALSO THE R EMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE FIRST SIX G ROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT ARE SETTLED BY THE FACTUAL NARRATION THAT FOLLOWS: 1. NOTICE U/S 153C DATED 06.10.2006 WAS SERVED ON T HE ASSESSEE ON 10.10.2006. 2. ASSESSEE HAS DEMANDED REASONS RECORDED FOR INITI ATING PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A(A) R.W.S 153C. THE SAME HAS BE EN FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 05.01.2007 AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF HIGH COURT. 3. VIDE ORDER IN WRIT PETITION NO.47604 OF 2006 (CO PY OF WHICH IS ENCLOSED) OF HIGH COURT DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFI CER TO FURNISH THE SWORN STATEMENT OF SHRI DINESH R.MEHTA, WHICH IS RELEVANT AND BASIS FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 153C WIT HIN TWO WEEKS FROM 11.12.2006 (I.E. BEFORE 09.01.2007). STATEMENT S HAVE BEEN FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 05.01.2007. THE H IGH COURT HAS DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE RETURN OF INC OME WITHIN FOUR WEEKS FROM RECEIPT OF THE ABOVE STATEMENTS. THE ASS ESSEE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.03-2007. HE MUST HAVE FILED THE RETURN ON OR BEFORE 02.02-2007. 4. THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED ON 30.03.2007, I.E. WITHIN 60 DAYS AS PER PROVISO TO EXPLANATION TO SEC .153B AND HENCE NOT TIME BARRED. 5. HENCE THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE WITHIN TIME AND AS SESSEES CONTENTION THAT THE ASSESSMENT IS BARRED BY LIMITAT ION, IS NOT CORRECT. 6,1 AS PER THE MERITS OF THE CASE THE MAIN ISSUE IS THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF CLOSING STOCK AND RECEIVABLE IN A CONCERN NAMED VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE (VBW IN S HORT). THE ADDITION WAS MADE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS AND THE S AME WAS MADE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS IN THE CASE OF SM DINESH MEHTA, A CLOSE RELATE OF THE APPELLANT (APPELLANT IS SON OF SHRI DINESH MEHTAS ELDER BROTHER). SHRI DINESH MEHTA, AS PER S TATEMENT ON PAGE L0 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 08.03.2005 ST ATED THAT 17 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 THE ENTIRE BUSINESS IN THE NAME OF VBW BELONGS TO H IM. HOWEVER, IN THE EARLIER STATEMENT DATED 23,02.2005, SHRI DINESH MEHTA HAD STATED THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY C ONNECTION WITH THE CONCERN VBW. WHEREAS, THE APPELLANT HAS BE EN THROUGHOUT DENYING HIS CONNECTION WITH THE CONCERN VBW AND STATED THAT THE SAME BELONGED TO MR. DINESH MEHTA. AGAIN. IN THE LETTER DATED 01-11-2006 ADDRESSED TO THE ACIT, SHRI DINESH MEHTA (AS QUOTED ON PAGE 4 & 5 OF ORDER DATED 15.03 .2018 OF SHRI DINESH MEHTA) HAD STATED THAT VBW DOES NOT BEL ONG TO HIM. 6.2 MEANWHILE, THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED IN THE CASE OF SHRI DINESH MEHTA WENT UPTO ITAT. CHENNAI AND THE HONBLE TAT CHENNAI SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER FOR READJUDICATION AS FOLLOWS: (QUOTE] THE ISSUES N THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE F ILE OF THE A0 FOR READJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASS ESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SUBSEQUENT TO THE ABOVE RESTORATION OF THE CASE, PASSED AN ORDER U/S 254 DA TED 15.03.2018 STATING AS ORDER PASSED TO GIVE EFFECT T O THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE TAT FOR THE SET ASIDE ASSESSMENT U/S 143 (3) R.W.S 254 PASSED ON 30.12.2011, A PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE OR DER SHOWS THAT ON THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY SHRI DINESH MEHTA, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONCLUDED AS FOLLOWS: (QUOTEL THUS AS IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS, IN RESPECT OF ARRIVI NG UNACCOUNTED PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE. ONLY THE SALES OF THE ASSESSEE IS CONSIDERED AND THE UNACCOUNTED SALES OF TILE ASSESSEE WHICH IS THE UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE OF RAJU MEHTA AND THAT OF M/S. VIKAS SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS AND SPARE S. IS TO BE EXCLUDED AS THE MO AM NOT CONNECTED WITH THE ASSESS EE AS ADVANCED BY THE SUBMISSIONS END DOCUMENTS FURNISHED . WITH RESPECT TO THE SALES ATTRIBUTABLE TO RAJU MEHT A, AS THE DEPARTMENT HAS IDENTIFIED THE SALES TO VIKAS BEARIN G AND WIRES 18 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 AS PURCHASE FROM A&N ENGINEERING IN HIS PROTECTIVE ASSESSMENT. AND WAS ALREADY ASSESSED IN THE HANDS O F RAJU MEHTA FURTHER WITH THE EXPLANATIONS OF THE APPELLAN T, AS ABOVE, THE SAME IS EXCLUDED FROM THE SALES VALUE OF THE AS SESSEE. [UNQUOTE] 6.3 THE FOLLOWING ASSERTIONS MADE IN THE CASE OF SH RI DINESH MEHTA FOUND FVOUR OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. (QUOTE] THE BUSINESS OF VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES DOES NOT A LSO BELONG TO ME AND HENCE THE INCOME CANNOT BE TAXED I N MY HANDS. THE BUSINESS BELONGS SOME OTHER POISON AND T HE PRINCIPAL BUSINESS IS LOCATED AT COIMBATORE. UNDERS TAND THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAD SEARCHED THE SAID PREMISES AND SEIZE D DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS. 2. M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES: THE INCOME, STOCK END INVESTMENTS OF VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES TOO WRONGLY ATTRIBUTED THE CONTROI AND INCOME OF TH E APPELLANT. MS VIKAS BEARINGS AND WIRES IS A PROPRIETARY CONCE RN UNDER THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF ONE RAJU P,MEHTA AT COIMBATORE. FURTHER EVIDENCE WAS PROVIDED TO SHOW THAT AS PER SALES TAX RECORDS, THE GODOWNS CONTAINING THE S TOCKS THAT WERE SEIZED BELONGS TO MR. RAJU MEHTA WHO ARE ALL I NTENT AND PURPOSES HAS CONTROLLING POWER OVER THE BUSINESS EN TITY. THE SAID RAJU MEHTA HAS FILED INCOME TAX RETURNS TOO IN THE NAME OF MS VIKAS BEARINGS AND WIRES. THE EVIDENCES TO SHOW THAT THE CONCERN IS. INDEED, IN THE NAME OF RAJU MEHTA, EARN ER ATTACHED. HOWEVER THE INCOME OF M/S VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES E ND MS VIKAS SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS & SPARES WORE DEEMED AS THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT, THE MASON BEING HAT THE AC IT CAME TO THE ERRONEOUS CONCLUSION THAT THE APPELLANT HAD CON TROLLING POWER AND RIGHTS OVER THE BUSINESS CONCERN. THIS IS WRONG IN BOTH FACT AND LAW AS THE BUSINESS ENTITY IS UNDER THE CONTROL OF MR. RAJU P. MEHTA.THIS FACT IS SUPPORTED BY RECORDS WHICH NAME MR. RAJU P.MEHTA AS THE PROPR IETOR OF 19 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 THE BUSINESS CONCERN OF M/S VIKAS BEARINGS AND WIRE S AND M/S. VIKAS SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS & SPARES IS A PARTNERSHIP F IRM IN WHICH MR. RAFTS MEHTA IS ONE OF THE PARTNERS. THERE IS NO RATIONAL BASIS ON WHICH THE INCOME OF M/S VIKAS BEA RINGS AND WIRES AND MS VIKAS SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS & SPARES CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE APPELLANT. FURTHER, THE INCOME OF THE BUSINESS ENTITY SHOULD N OT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT AS IT A SEPARATE ENTITY. DISTINCT FROM THE APPELLANT. THE A PPELLANT CONTESTED AGAINST THE CLUBBING OF INCOME IN LETTER DATED 25 TH SEPTEMBER 2006 1 ST NOVEMBER 2006, 22 ND DECEMBER 2011, 28 TH DECEMBER 2011, BUT THE SAME WAS SUBSEQUENTLY REJE CTED BY THE ACIT CITING THE PREVIOUS ACCEPTANCE OF THE A PPELLANT. BOTH VIKAS BEARING & WIRES AND VIKAS SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS & SPARES AM NOT CONCERNS OF THE ASSOSSEE AS P ER THE RECORDS SUBMITTED AND INFORMATION PURSUED. [UNQUOTE] 6.4 THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE AO WAS MADE KNOWN TO THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT AT THE T IME OF HEARING ON 29.112019. THESE FACTS ARE NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE APPELLANT. THEREFORE, THE PROTECTIVE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE CAS E OF APPELLANT IS UPHELD. 6. THE FIRST ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON FROM GROUND NOS.4 TO 7 OF ASSESSEE APPEALS FOR ALL ASSE SSMENT YEARS IS PROTECTIVE ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSING OFF ICER TOWARDS UNACCOUNTED CLOSING STOCK AND UNACCOUNTED RECEIVAB LES OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE, PROPRIE TARY CONCERN OF ASSESSEE . THE LEARNED AR FOR ASSESSEE SUBMITTED 20 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS LEARNED CIT (A) WERE ERRED IN MAKING PROTECTIVE ADDITIONS IN THE HANDS O F ASSESSEE TOWARDS UNACCOUNTED STOCK AND RECEIVABLES FOUND DU RING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHT A, EVEN THOUGH INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COU RSE OF SEARCH COUPLED WITH STATEMENTS RECORDED FROM VARIOU S PARTIES CLEARLY INDICATE THAT DATA RETRIEVED FROM COMPUTER MAINTAINED IN THE NAME OF M/S.A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY IS NOT AT ALL BELONGS TO ASSESSEE AND THE SAME CANNOT BE ADDED EVEN ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. THE AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT RIG HT FROM DATE OF SEARCH ASE HAS MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE IS ONLY WO RKING FOR MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND RECEIVING SALARY AND WHATEVER BU SINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE, IS IN FACT, CARRIED OUT BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTE M FOUND DURING COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE NAME OF M/S.A&N ENGI NEERING COMPANY IS BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY MR. DINESH R MEHT A. THE AR REFERRING TO VARIOUS DOCUMENTS INCLUDING STATEME NTS RECORDED FROM MR. DINESH R MEHTA, HIS EMPLOYEES MRS . CHITRA AND MR.M.BABU SUBMITTED THAT ALL PERSONS HAVE CATE GORICALLY 21 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ADMITTED THAT M/S.A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY, IS A PAP ER COMPANY AND TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE, SALES, STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTEM ARE TRA NSACTIONS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA CARRIED OUT IN THREE DIFFEREN T CONCERNS NAMELY M/S. VIKAS BEARING CORPORATION, CHENNAI, M/S . VIKAS SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS AND SPARES, CHENNAI AND M/S. VI KAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE. HE FURTHER SUBMITT ED THAT ALL ALONG MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS ADMITTED THAT HE OWNED UP BUSINESS AND BUSINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF M/ S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, BUT FILED RETRACTION STATEMENT AFTER MORE THAN 5 YEARS THAT TOO WITHOUT ANY CHANGE IN FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND ALSO IN ABSENCE OF ANY NEW EVIDENCES. ALTHOUGH, MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS FILED R ETRACTION STATEMENT, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT ACCEPTED RET RACTION STATEMENT FILED BY HIM AND REAFFIRMED HIS STAND IN RESPECT OF OWNERSHIP OF BUSINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF M/ S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, AND MADE ADDITIONS ON SUBSTANT IVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THE AR FURTHER REFERRING TO ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001- 02 TO 2005- 06 IN THE CASE OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA SUBMITTED THA T LEARNED 22 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 CIT(A) HAS AFFIRMED FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF OWNERSHIP OF BUSINESS AND UNACCOUNTED INCOME FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN FORM OF STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES AND HELD THAT SAID BUSINESS WAS IN FACT CARRIED OUT BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND ASSESSEE HAS ONLY LENT H IS NAME. IN FACT, THE MATTER REACHED TRIBUNAL AND BEFORE TRI BUNAL PLEADING OF ASSESSEE WAS IN RESPECT OF VIOLATION O F PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY ASSESSING OFFICER IN NOT PROVI DING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO ASSESSEE , BUT THERE IS N O GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR PLEADING CHALLENGING FINDINGS RECORDED BY ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS AFFIRMED BY LEARNED CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF OWNERSHIP OF BUSINESS AND UNACCOUNTED INCOME FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE NAME OF M/S. VIKAS BEAR ING AND WIRES. THE TRIBUNAL UNDER THOSE FACTS AND AFTER CO NSIDERING PLEA OF ASSESSEE REGARDING INADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING HAS SET ASIDE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFF ICER. ALTHOUGH, TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE APPEALS, BUT THERE IS NO DIR ECTIONS OF WHATSOEVER IN RESPECT OF OWNERSHIP OF BUSINESS AND UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE NAME OF M/S. VIKAS BEARIN G AND WIRES AND ADDED IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHT A ON 23 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 SUBSTANTIVE BASIS. ALTHOUGH, THERE IS NO DIRECTION FROM THE TRIBUNAL IN REGARD TO OWNERSHIP OF BUSINESS AND UNA CCOUNTED INCOME, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASONS HAS DELETED STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES FOUND DU RING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ATTRIBUTABLE TO PROPRIETARY CONCER N M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE, WHILE CONCLUDING A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN CONSEQUENT TO PROCEEDINGS U/S. 143(3 ) R.W.S 254 OF THE ACT. 7. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUP PORTING ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MERIT IN ARGUMENTS TAKEN BY ASSESSEE THAT ADDITION WAS MADE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE TOWARDS U NACCOUNTED STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES, BECAUSE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION TOWARDS STOCK IN TRADE A ND RECEIVABLES AFTER CONSIDERING FACT THAT ASSESSEE IS LEGAL OWNER OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE AND ALL TRANSACTIONS ARE CARRIED OUT IN HIS NAME. THE DR FU RTHER REFERRING TO ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER AND LEARN ED CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT BUT FOR RECORDING FACT THAT ADDITIO NS WERE MADE 24 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ON PROTECTIVE BASIS BY LEARNED CIT(A), ALL DISCUSSI ONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSESSMENT ORDER CLEARLY INDI CATE THAT M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE WAS OWNED BY ASSESSEE MR. RAJU P.MEHTA. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED TH AT ALTHOUGH, MR. DINESH R MEHTA INITIALLY OWNED UP BUS INESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WI RES, COIMBATORE, BUT SUBSEQUENTLY, HE HAS FILED RETRACT IVE STATEMENT AND DISOWNED THE BUSINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME O F M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. NO DOUBT, IN FIRST AND SECOND ROUND OF PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CONCLUDED THAT T RANSACTIONS RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTEM FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY IS BELO NGED TO MR. DINESH R MEHTA, BUT ON VERIFICATION OF RELEVANT DETAILS FILED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA DURING THIRD ROUND OF LITIGAT ION CAME TO CONCLUSION THAT UNACCOUNTED STOCK IN TRADE AND RECE IVABLES PERTAINS TO M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, CANNOT BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THEREFORE, IT IS V ERY CLEAR FROM RECORDS THAT ASSESSEE IS OWNER OF BUSINESS CAR RIED OUT UNDER THE NAME & STYLE OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND W IRES, COIMBATORE AND WHATEVER CLOSING STOCK AND RECEIVAB LES FOUND 25 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH SHOULD BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIAL AVA ILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. THE FACTS BORNE OUT FROM RECORDS INDICATE THAT THERE WA S SEARCH IN THE CASE OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA ON 23.02.2005. DURIN G THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SURVEY OPERATIONS, VARIOUS BUS INESS PREMISES INCLUDING GODOWNS OWNED IN THE NAME OF M/S . VIKAS BEARING CORPORATION, CHENNAI, M/S. VIKAS SUBMERSIBL E PUMPS AND SPARES, CHENNAI AND M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND W IRES, COIMBATORE WAS COVERED. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH VARIOUS INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS INCLUDING A COMPUTER SYSTEM WAS FOUND, WHERE UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE A ND SALES WERE RECORDED IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING C OMPANY. THE SAID COMPUTER SYSTEM WAS FOUND IN THE PREMISES OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND SAME HAS BEEN MARKED AS ANNEXURE SKM/LS/S-1-20. MR. DINESH R MEHTA IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S.132(4) OF THE ACT HAS ADMITTED THAT TRANSACTION S RECORDED IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY BELONGS TO HIM AND ALSO HAS OWNED UP UNACCOUNTED STOCK FOUND DURIN G THE 26 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 COURSE OF SEARCH. MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS ALSO CONFI RMED THE FACT VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 30.3.2005 AND OWNED UP BUSINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE AND ALSO UNACCOUNTED STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND RECEIVABLES AS PER COMPUTER SY STEM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITIONS TOWARDS UNACC OUNTED STOCK AND RECEIVABLES FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SE ARCH IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE O N SUBSTANTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEH TA FOR THE REASONS RECORDED IN ASSESSMENT ORDER, AS PER WHICH ALTHOUGH, BUSINESS WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE M R.RAJU P MEHTA, BUT DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEA RCH COUPLED WITH STATEMENT RECORDED FROM MR. DINESH R M EHTA AND HIS EMPLOYEES CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THE FACT THAT BUS INESS WAS CARRIED OUT BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND ASSESSEE IS O NLY WORKING IN HIS FIRM FOR SALARY. THIS FACT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY ASSESSEE IN STATEMENT RECORDED U/S.132(4) OF THE AC T DURING THE COURSE OF AND POST SEARCH INVESTIGATION. THE ASSES SING OFFICER AS WELL AS LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DISCUSSED AT LENGTH T HE MODUS OPERANDI OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA IN RECORDING UNACCO UNTED 27 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE AND SALES, STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES IN THE NAME OF M/S.A&N ENGINEERING COMP ANY, A PAPER COMPANY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FURTHER B ROUGHT OUT VARIOUS REASONS TO COME TO CONCLUSION THAT TRANSAC TIONS RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTEM IN THE NAME OF M/S. VIK AS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE IS BELONGED TO MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION COLLECTED D URING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND POST-SEARCH ENQUIRIES, A CONCL USION HAS BEEN ARRIVED AT AND ACCORDINGLY, ADDITIONS WAS MADE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS MR. DINESH R MEHTA, BUT BECAUSE ASSESSEE WAS LEGAL OWNER OF THE FIRM M/S. V IKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE, PROTECTIVE ADDITIO N WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON STOCK IN TRADE AND RECE IVABLES. 9. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO T HE FACTS BROUGHT OUT BY ASSESSING OFFICER ALONG WITH VARIOUS EVIDENCES FILED BY ASSESSEE INCLUDING ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA. ON VERIFICATION OF VARIOUS D ETAILS FILED BY ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT TRANSACTIONS UNDERTAKEN IN T HE NAME OF 28 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE HAPPENED THROUGH PAPER COMPANY M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY IS FULL Y CONTROLLED AND OPERATED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND A SSESSEE HAD NO CONTROL ON TRANSACTIONS WHICH HAPPENED OUTS IDE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, SINCE AS PER SEIZED DOCUMENTS AND COR ROBORATIVE STATEMENTS, TRANSACTIONS WERE NOT UNDERTAKEN BY ASS ESSEE. FURTHER, ALL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES SHOW THAT TRANSA CTIONS HAPPENED OUTSIDE BOOKS ARE MAINTAINED SEPARATELY BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA IN THE NAME OF FICTITIOUS ENTITY M/S . A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY. MR. DINESH R MEHTA ALSO MAINT AINED SEPARATE LEDGER FOR UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS. THE E NTRIES FOUND IN M/S. A&N ENGINEERING & BEARING LEDGER ACCO UNT MAINTAINED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA WERE TALLIED. FRO M THE ABOVE, IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIO NS MAINTAINED IN THE COMPUTER SYSTEM UNDER THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY IS NOT AT ALL BELONGED TO THE A SSESSEE. FURTHER, DATA FOUND IN COMPUTER WAS KEPT IN THE PRE MISES OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND WAS SEIZED DURING COURSE OF SEAR CH FROM HIS PREMISES. ONCE ANY DOCUMENT OR EVIDENCE FOUND IN POSSESSION OF A PERSON, THEN PRESUMPTION AS PER SEC TION 292C 29 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 IS ON THE PERSON FROM WHOSE POSSESSION SAID DOCUMEN TS WERE FOUND OR SEIZED UNLESS THE PERSON IN WHOSE POSSESSI ON BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND EXPLAINS WITH PR OPER EVIDENCE THAT SAID DOCUMENTS WERE NOT BELONGED TO H IM, THEN PRESUMPTION IS THAT SUCH BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUME NTS BELONGS TO SUCH PERSON. IN THIS CASE, DOCUMENTS F OUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH FROM THE PREMISES OF MR. DINES H R MEHTA CLEARLY INDICATE THAT UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS RECO RDED IN THE NAME OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES WAS CARRIED OU T BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND ASSESSEE HAS NO ROLE ON IT. THIS FACT IS FURTHER STRENGTHENED BY BANK ACCOUNT OPENED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA AT CITY UNION BANK, COIMBATORE WITH ACCOUNT N O.3067 WHICH COINCIDES WITH REGISTRATION OF M/S. VIKAS BEA RING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE. THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT HAS DEPOSI TS BY WAY OF CLEARING AND WITHDRAWAL BY CASH. MR. DINESH R M EHTA HAS BEEN OPERATING SAID BANK ACCOUNTS WITH CITY UNION B ANK FROM DECEMBER, 2000 ONWARDS. THIS FACT IS FURTHER STRENG THENED BY FACT THAT MR. DINESH R MEHTA HIMSELF ADMITTED THA T FROM 01.04.2004 HE HAS TAKEN OVER M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE. THE ASSESSEE HAS OPERATED SEPARATE BANK 30 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF TRANSACTIONS CARRIED OUT IN T HE NAME OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE WITH HDFC BANK, COIMBATORE WHICH IS BEING REFLECTED IN REGULAR BOOK S MAINTAINED FOR THE YEAR AND ALSO SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE MM/B&D/S039 DATED 28.02.2005. THE TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN HDFC BANK ACCOUNT ARE PART OF REGULAR RETURNS FILED BY ASSESSEE. FURT HER, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, IT WAS FOUND THAT TRANSACTIONS RE CORDED IN M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY RELATABLE TO ACCOUNT N O.3530 MAINTAINED WITH CITY UNION BANK, COIMBATORE AND OPE RATED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA. THUS, IT COULD BE SEEN THAT ALL TRANSACTIONS THAT ARE ROUTED THROUGH M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPAN Y AND MAINTAINED IN COMPUTER FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF S EARCH ARE TRANSACTIONS NOT RELATABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. 10. WE FURTHER NOTED THAT WHILE CONCLUDING ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE FAC T THAT UNACCOUNTED STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES FOUND IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY BELONGS TO MR. DINE SH R MEHTA HAS CHANGED HIS STAND DURING THIRD ROUND OF L ITIGATION, WHEN HE HAS TAKEN UP PROCEEDINGS IN CONSEQUENT TO D IRECTIONS 31 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 OF TRIBUNAL U/S. 254 OF THE ACT, WITHOUT BRINGING O N RECORD EVIDENCE AND CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING AT THE TIME O F FRAMING ASSESSMENT ORDER IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE DATE OF SEA RCH WERE SUDDENLY CHANGED, WHEN HE HAS FRAMED ASSESSMENT ORD ER IN CONSEQUENT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF TRIBUNAL. IN FACT, TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT MAKING ANY COMMENTS ON MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS M ADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER. THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE APPE AL ONLY ON THE GROUND OF PLEADING OF ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO EXPL AIN ITS CASE . HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THIRD ROUND OF LITIGATION WITHOUT RECORDING ANY CHANGE IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES OF THE CASE AND ALSO BRINGING ON RECORD ANY NEW EVIDENCE S UGGESTS UNACCOUNTED STOCK IN TRADE WAS ORIGINALLY ADDED IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA WOULD BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE AND TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF MR.RAJU P MEHTA . IN OUR C ONSIDERED VIEW, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS EXCEEDED HIS POWER IN GOING BEYOND THE DIRECTIONS OF TRIBUNAL WITHOUT ANY FINDI NGS REGARDING ISSUE OF OWNERSHIP OF BUSINESS AND CONSEQUENT UNAC COUNTED STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES, MORE PARTICULARLY, WHEN MR. 32 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 DINESH R MEHTA, HIMSELF HAS OWNED UP AND ADMITTED B USINESS RIGHT FROM DATE OF SEARCH WHILE RECORDING STATEMEN T U/S. 132(4) AND ALSO SUBSEQUENT CONFIRMATION BY WAY OF LETTER T O THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ALTHOUGH, HE HAS FILED RETRACTI ON STATEMENT AFTER A GAP OF MORE THAN FIVE YEARS, THAT TOO WITHO UT ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO PROVE THAT UNACCOUNTED TRANSA CTIONS RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTEM IS NOT BELONGED TO HIM. ON THE OTHER HAND, VARIOUS SEIZED DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING T HE COURSE OF SEARCH REVEALED THAT MODUS OPERANDI OF MR. DINES H R MEHTA TO PURCHASE GOODS OUTSIDE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FROM VAR IOUS PARTIES AND TO MAKE PAYMENT TO THOSE PURCHASES IN CASH . THIS FACT IS STRENGTHENED BY EVIDENCE COLLECTED DURING T HE COURSE OF SEARCH THAT MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS ISSUED CHEQUES W HICH ARE ENCASHED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF S.N.SHA H AT UNION BANK OF INDIA, MADRAS MAIN BRANCH IN ACCOUNT NO.1/008924. THIS ACCOUNT WAS OPENED AND OPERATED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA GIVING HIS OWN PHOTOGRAPH AND ACCOUN T WAS INTRODUCED BY MR. R.BABU, HIS OWN EMPLOYEE. THEREFO RE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ASSESSING OFFICER H AS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITIONS EVEN ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN THE HA NDS OF 33 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ASSESSEE TOWARDS STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES, WH EN VARIOUS EVIDENCES COUPLED WITH STATEMENT OF MR. DINESH R M EHTA RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CLEARLY ESTABL ISHED THE FACT THAT MR. DINESH R MEHTA IS OWNER OF M/S. VIKA S BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE AND UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTEM IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEE RING COMPANY, A FICTITIOUS ENTITY IS NOT BELONGED TO ASS ESSEE. FURTHER, ALTHOUGH MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS FILED RET RACTION, SUCH RETRACTION WAS GENERAL IN NATURE AND THERE IS NO S PECIFIC MENTION OF PARTICULAR ADMISSION WHICH WAS CLAIMED TO BE RETRACTED. THE SAID RETRACTION IS UNSUBSTANTIATED. IT IS WELL SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT BURDEN TO PROVE ADMIS SION AS INCORRECT IS ON THE MAKER AND IN CASE, THERE IS FA ILURE OF THE MAKER TO PROVE THAT EARLIER STATED FACTS WERE WRON G, HIS EARLIER STATEMENTS ARE SUFFICIENT TO CONCLUDE THE MATTER. HOWEVER, IF RETRACTION IS PROVED SUFFICIENTLY, THE EARLIER STAT ED FACTS OR ADMISSIONS LOOSE THEIR EFFECT AND RELEVANCE AS B INDING EVIDENCE AND INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES CANNOT CONCLUD E THE MATTER ON THE BASIS OF SUCH EARLIER STATEMENT ALONE . AT THE SAME TIME, GENERAL RETRACTION OF EARLIER ADMISSION S WILL NOT BE 34 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ENOUGH AND EVEN AFTER RETRACTION SUCH EARLIER ADM ISSIONS CANNOT AUTOMATICALLY BECOME NULLITY. FURTHER, MEREL Y BECAUSE STATEMENT IS RETRACTED, IT CANNOT BECOME AS INVOLUN TARY OR UNLAWFULLY OBTAINED. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONS IDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHILE CONCLUDING ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS E XCLUDED UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS OF STOCK IN TRADE AND RE CEIVABLES PERTAINS TO M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBA TORE WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY CHANGE IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F CASE PREVAILING AT THE TIME OF MAKING SUBSTANTIVE ADDIT IONS IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND PROTECTIVE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. THIS VIEW IS FORTIFIED BY DECISI ONS OF VARIOUS HIGH COURTS, IN PARTICULARLY IN THE FOLLOWING CAS E LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE:- 12. RETRACTION WHICH IS MADE BY DRM IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND THERE IS NO SPECIFIC MENTION OF A PARTI CULAR ADMISSION WHICH WAS CLAIMED TO BE RETRACTED. THE SAID RETRACTION IS UNSUBSTANTIATED. THERE WAS NO REFERENCE OR MENTION OF ANY EVIDENCE. THERE HAS BEEN NO PRESSURE OR TORTURE, IF THERE WAS SUCH AN ALLEGATION THAN DRM WOULD HAVE COMPLAINED THE SAME TO THE COMMISSIONER OR TO ANY OTHER AUTHORITY . 35 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 LAW IN RESPECT OF ADMISSIBILITY OF A RETRACTION IS VERY WELL SETTLED. THERE MUST BE SOME CONVINCING AND EFFECTIVE EVIDENCE IN THE HANDS DRM THROUGH WHICH HE COULD DEMONSTRATE THAT THE SAID STATEMENT WAS FACTUALLY INCORRECT. ORM IS UNDER STRICT OBLIGATIO N TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE STATEMENT RECORDED EARLIER WA S INCORRECT, THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF THOSE SPECIF IC EVIDENCES LATER ON RETRACTED, FURTHER THERE SHOULD ALSO BE SOME STRONG EVIDENCE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE EARLIER STATEMENT RECORDED WAS UNDER COERCION. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE RETRACTION IS GENERAL IN NAT URE AND LACKING ANY SUPPORTIVE EVIDENCE, RATHER URM TOOK A YEAR AND HALF TO RETRACT THE INITIAL STATEM ENT, WHICH BY ITSELF CREATED A SERIOUS DOUBT. LAW IN RESPECT OF ADMISSIBILITY OF A RETRACTION IS VERY W ELL SETTLED. T.S. KUMARASAMY V. ASSTT. CIT [1998] 65 LTD 188 (MAD.): IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THOUGH THERE WAS A RETRACTION OF ADMISSION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESS EE, ONE YEAR LATER, ENOUGH GOOD REASONS WERE NOT GIVEN BY HIM FOR RETRACTING FROM HIS VOLUNTARY ADMISSIONS , CONSEQUENTLY, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY COGENT REASON WITH CREDIBLE EVIDENCE, THE COURT REJECTED THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THOSE ADMISSIONS WERE MADE UNDER COERCION OR DURESS AND WERE NOT VOLUNTARY. DRAWING SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN T HE 36 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 CASE OF SURJEEET SINGH CHHABRA V. UNION OF INDIA [19971 1 SCC 508 THE TRIBUNAL DISALLOWED PLEA OF RETRACTION OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT NEITH ER THE GROUND OF COERCION OR DURESS NOR THE GROUND OF INVOLUNTARY STATEMENT WAS PROVED TO HAVE EXISTED AT THE TIME OF RECORDING OF THE STATEMENT. THIS DECISI ON OF THE TRIBUNAL GOES TO INDICATE THAT ADMISSIONS OR CONFESSIONS MADE IN THE STATEMENTS RECORDED DURING SEARCH OR SURVEY, WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY OTHER EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT SUCH ADMISSIONS, CAN SUCCESSFUL LY BE MADE USE OF TO ASSESS THE INCOME, UNLESS THEY AR E PROVED TO BE INVOLUNTARY OR ARE PROVED TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN UNDER DURESS, COERCION, MISCONCEPTION, ETC. ASSTT. CIT.. RAMESH CHANDRA R. PATEL [2004] 89 LTD 203 (AHD.) (TM): IT WAS ACCEPTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD A RIGHT TO RETRACT BUT THAT HAS TO BE BASED ON EVIDENCE BROUGH T ON RECORD TO THE CONTRARY AND THERE MUST BE JUSTIFI ABLE REASON AND MATERIAL ACCEPTING RETRACTION I.E., COGE NT AND SUFFICIENT MATERIAL HAVE TO BE PLACED ON RECORD FOR ACCEPTANCE OR RETRACTION. ALL THAT HAS TO BE DONE B Y THE ASSESSEE IF HE IS TO RETRACT THE STATEMENT WHICH WA S RECORDED IN THE PRESENCE OF WITNESSES UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF PRESSURE OR COERCION. THE FACTS OF EACH CASE HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED TO REACH THE CONCLUSION 37 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 WHETHER RETRACTION WAS POSSIBLE OR NOT AS THERE CAN BE NO UNIVERSAL RULE. CIT VS. LEKH RAJ DHUNNA: 344 ITR 352 (P & H] IN CASE THE STATEMENT WHICH WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE WAS UNDER PRESSUR E OR DUE TO COERCION, THE ASSESSEE COULD HAVE RETRACT ED FROM THE SAME AT THE EARLIEST, NO PLAUSIBLE EXPLANA TION HAS BEEN FURNISHED AS TO WHY THE SAID STATEMENT COU LD NOT BE WITHDRAWN EARLIER. IN SUCH A SITUATION, THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE STATEMENT BY VIRTUE OF WHICH SURRENDER HAD BEEN MADE AT THE TIME OF SEARCH CANNO T BE HELD TO BE BAD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. HUKUM CHAND JAM & ORS. 337 ITR 0238-CHHATTIGARH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. BHOGILAL MULCHAND KANDO-96 LTD 0344 13. VIKAS BEARINGS AND WIRES IS A PROPRIETARY CONCE RN REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE RAJU P MEHTA ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN BEARINGS AND WIRES. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN RECEIVING MONTHLY I- ENUMERATION FOR THIS AND THE SAME HAS BEEN ADMITTED BY THE APPELLANT ORIGINALLY AS DRAWINGS AND IN THE REVISED RETURN UNDER THE HEAD SALARY. FOR ALL 38 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 TRANSACTION UNDERTAKEN BY THE APPELLANT WHICH HAPPENED THROUGH PROPER BOOKS, THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN REGULARLY FILING ITS RETURNS. THE APPELLANT HA D NO CONTROL ON TRANSACTIONS WHICH HAPPENS OUTSIDE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT SINCE IT IS CONTROLLED BY DRM. THE TRANSACTIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED OUTSIDE THE BOOKS ARE MAINTAINED SEPARATELY BY DINESH R MEHTA IN THE NAME OF 6CTITIOUS ENTITY CALLED A&N ENGINEERING. DINESH R MEHTA ALSO MAINTAINED SEPARATE LEDGER FOR UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTION FOR VIKAS REARING AND WIRES . THE ENTRIES IN BOTH WOULD TALLY. THESE ENTRIES CONT AIN MATERIALS SUPPLIED BY DINESH R MEHTA TO VBW OUTSIDE BOOKS AND ALSO AMOUNTS THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED ALTE R SELLING THE MATERIALS. BEARINGS IS ANOTHER FICTITI OUS ENTRY. BEARINGS BOOKS ARE OFFSHOOT OF A&N ENGINEERI NG AND CONTAINS ONLY POSTINGS OF AMOUNTS RECEIVED FROM VBW AFTER SELLING OF MATERIALS SUPPLIED BY DRM. THESE HAVE BEEN MISCONSTRUED AS RECEIVABLES BY VBW. DRM HAS OWNED UP TRANSACTIONS THAT HAS HAPPENED OUTSIDE VBW AND THE SAME CANNOT BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO SEE WHY SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE CASE OF DINESH R MEHTA FOR THE AY 2001-02 TO 2005-06, ON WHICH PROTECTIVE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE AGAINST THE APPELLANT WHICH THE APPELLANT IS PRESENTLY AGGRIEVE D, 39 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 WHY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY CONFIRMED THE SAI D SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION ON TWO OCCASIONS VIDE ORDERS DATED 20.05.2010 AND 24.06.2014 AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BASIS IN WHICH THE TRIBUNAL H AD RESTORED THE ASSESSMENTS TO THE FILE OF THE AY VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 09.112010 AND SUBSEQUENTLY VIDE ITS ORD ER DATED 30.06.2017. THIS WOULD GIVE A WHOLISTIC PERSPECTIVE ON THE ISSUE TO DECIDE IF THE FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY WAS JUSTIFIED IN SUBSTANTIVELY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION WHICH WAS PROTECTIVELY MADE BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER. 11. FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT TRANSACTI ONS RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTEM IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEER ING COMPANY RELATABLE TO M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRE S, COIMBATORE IS NOT BELONGS TO ASSESSEE, ALTHOUGH ASS ESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE FACT THAT SAID TRANSACTIO NS ARE NOT RELATABLE TO THE ASSESSEE AND WAS ASSESSABLE IN TH E HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND ALSO MADE ADDITIONS ORIGINAL LY IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA WAS ERRED IN MAKING PRO TECTIVE ADDITIONS IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE, EVEN THOUGH EV IDENCES COLLECTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH REMOTELY EST ABLISHED THE FACT THAT SAID TRANSACTIONS IN FACT, BELONGED TO T HE ASSESSEE. 40 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 FURTHER, LEARNED CIT(A) WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND HAS SIMPLY UPHELD PROTECTIVE ADDITION ONLY FOR THE REASON THAT ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS ORDER DATED 15.03.2018 IN THE CAS E OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS HELD THAT INCOME OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ASSESSED IN THE HAN DS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA, AS THEY ARE SEPARATE ENTITIES DISTI NCT FROM MR. DINESH R MEHTA. ONLY ON THE BASIS OF RETRACTION FIL ED BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 25.09.2006, AL THOUGH THE SAID RETRACTION WAS TWICE REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER.. WE FURTHER NOTED THAT ALL EVIDENCES GATHERED DURING CO URSE OF SEARCH AND POST-SEARCH ENQUIRIES WERE CLEARLY SHOWN THAT UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS OF STOCK IN TRADE AND RECE IVABLES RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTEM WERE CARRIED OUT BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA, WHICH WAS AFFIRMED BY HIS TRUSTED EMPLOYEES. MR. DINESH R MEHTA HIMSELF HAS ADMITTED THE FACT THAT H E HAD CARRIED OUT SAID BUSINESS IN THE NAME OF RAJU P MEH TA. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT LEARN ED CIT(A) HAS COMPLETELY ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITIONS MADE B Y ASSESSING OFFICER ON PROTECTIVE BASIS TOWARDS ST OCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE . HENCE, WE DIRECT 41 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE ADDITIONS MADE TO WARDS UNACCOUNTED STOCK IN TRADE AND RECEIVABLES OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE IN THE HANDS OF ASS ESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 TO 2005-06. 12. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2004-05 TOWARDS PROT ECTIVE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF BALANCE WITH M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS M ADE ADDITION OF 20,06,686/- SPREAD OVER THREE ASSESSMENT YEARS STARTING FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY ON THE GROUND THAT UNDER THE ACCOUNT TITLED RPM OUTSTANDING AMOUNT L YING UNPAID TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS LEARNED CIT(A) THAT MR. DINESH R MEHTA WAS EXAMINED ON THIS ISSUE DURING THE COURS E OF SEARCH AND POST-SEARCH INVESTIGATION, WHERE HE HAD STATED THAT RPM REPRESENTS TO MR.RAJENDRA PRASAD MODI AND AMOUNT SH OWN AS ON 31.03.2004 IS PAYABLE TO HIM. HOWEVER, THE ASSES SING OFFICER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT RPM REFERS TO RAJ U P MEHTA 42 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 AND AMOUNT SHOWN IN THE NAME OF RPM IS PAYABLE TO H IM AND ACCORDINGLY MADE ADDITIONS OF 20,06,686/- FOR THREE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 13. THE LEARNED AR FOR ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ASS ESSEE HAS DISOWNED TOTAL UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS RECORD ED IN THE COMPUTER SYSTEM IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY RIGHT FROM THE DAY ONE AND ALSO MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS OWNED UP BUSINESS IN CONSEQUENT TO UNACCOUNTED CLOSING STOCK AND RECEIVABLE THEREFORE, NO ADDITION CAN B E MADE TOWARDS AN ENTRY MADE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M /S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY. 14. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUP PORTING ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT DOCUMENTS S EIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CLEARLY INDICATE UNACCO UNTED TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. A&N ENGI NEERING COMPANY RELATES TO M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES IS ASSESSABLE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE AND HENCE, LE ARNED CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY CONFIRMED ADDITIONS MADE BY ASS ESSING OFFICER AND HIS ORDER SHOULD BE UPHELD. 43 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 15. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIAL AV AILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. THE FACTS BORNE OUT FROM RECORDS INDICATE THAT INCR IMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE FORM OF COMPUTER HARDWARE MAINTAINED IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY INDICATES THAT A SUM OF 20,06,686/- WAS SHOWN AS DEBIT BALANCE IN THE NAME OF RPM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INFERRED THAT RPM REFERS TO RAJU P.MEHTA AND AMOUNT SHOWN IN THE NAME OF RPM IS ASSESSABLE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE AS UNACCOUNTE D INCOME. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH FACTS BROUGHT OUT BY ASSESSING OFFICER ALONG WITH ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE. ON VERIFICATION OF VARIOUS DETAILS FILED BY ASSESSEE, WE FIND M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY IS A FICTITIOU S ENTITY EXISTED IN PAPERS, BUT ALL TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHAS E AND SALES RECORDED IN THE NAME OF SAID ENTITY WAS BELONGED TO MR. DINESH R MEHTA. FURTHER, MR. DINESH R MEHTA HAS OWNED UP UNACCOUNTED BUSINESS CARRIED OUT IN THE NAME OF M/ S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES AND ON THAT BASIS, SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE NAME OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND W HICH WAS 44 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 UPHELD BY FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN SECOND ROUN D OF LITIGATION . HOWEVER, IN THIRD ROUND OF LITIGATION, ALL OF A SUD DEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SUDDENLY CHANGED HIS STAND A ND EXCLUDED UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN THE NAME OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY RELATABLE TO THE ASS ESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT MR. RAJU P.MEHTA WAS LEGAL OWNER O F M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, WITHOUT BRINGING ON RECO RD ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS CA RRIED OUT BY MR. DINESH R MEHTA WAS IN FACT, BELONGS TO ASSESSEE . FURTHER, THERE IS NO MATERIAL EVIDENCE WHICH WAS FOUND AT TH E TIME OF SEARCH TO DEMONSTRATE THAT ASSESSEE WAS BENEFITED BY SUCH ENTRY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M/S. A&N ENGINEER ING COMPANY. THE ASSESSEE HAS NO CONTROL OVER ENTRIES MADE IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ASSES SING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION TOWARDS BALANC E WITH M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY ON THE BASIS OF SINGLE SIDE ENTRY MADE IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY O N WHICH ASSESSEE DOES NOT HAVE ANY CONTROL. IT IS NOT THE C ASE OF ASSESSING OFFICER THAT IN THE BOOKS OF ASSESSEE CO RRESPONDING 45 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 CREDIT ENTRY TO JUSTIFY DEBIT BALANCE OF 20,06,686/- UNDER THE ACCOUNT TITLED RPM IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. A&N ENGIN EERING COMPANY. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS BALANC E WITH M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINAT ING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IS INCORRECT. HENCE, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS BALANCE WITH M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPANY OF 20,06,686/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 TO 2004-05. 16. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000 IS ADDITION MADE BY ASSES SING OFFICER TOWARDS CASH CREDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT AMOUNTI NG TO 3,15,000/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, IT WAS NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAD SB ACCOUNT WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, SEMBUDOSS STREET, CHENNAI, WHERE CASH DEPOSI T OF 3,15,000/- ON VARIOUS DATES HAS BEEN MADE. IT WAS FURTHER NOTED THAT IMMEDIATELY AFTER CASH DEPOSITS, AMOUNT HAD BEEN WITHDRAWN BY WAY OF CHEQUES. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT 46 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 EXPLAINED SATISFACTORILY SOURCE OF INCOME FOR CRED ITS FOUND IN BANK ACCOUNT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDIT ION OF 3,15,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF ASSESSEE. ON AP PEAL, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED ADDITION OF 1,54,400/- ON THE BASIS OF REMAND REPORT ISSUED BY ASSESSING OFFICE R, WHERE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED SOURCE OF INCOME FO R CASH DEPOSIT OF 1,60,600/-. 17. THE LEARNED AR FOR ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LEAR NED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITIONS TOWARDS CA SH DEPOSIT OF 1,54,400/- WITHOUT BRINGING ON RECORD FACT THAT A SSESSEE HAS SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT S AND SUCH SOURCE OF INCOME IS OUT OF LIQUIDATION OF OUTSTANDI NG DEBTORS IN RESPECT OF HIS BUSINESS ACTIVITY. THE LEARNED DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUPPORTED ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (A). 18. HAVING HEARD BOTH SIDES AND CONSIDERED MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAI N SOURCE OF INCOME FOR REMAINING CASH DEPOSIT OF 1,54,400/- , ALTHOUGH ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS IS OUT OF 47 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 LIQUIDATION OF DEBTORS, BUT FAILED TO FILE ANY EV IDENCE TO PROVE THAT CASH DEPOSIT IS OUT OF REALIZATION OF DEBTORS. HENCE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO ERROR IN TH E FINDINGS RECORDED BY LEARNED CIT(A) TO SUSTAIN ADDITIONS MAD E BY ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS CASH DEPOSIT OF 1,54,400/-. THEREFORE, WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD FINDINGS OF LE ARNED CIT(A) AND REJECT GROUNDS TAKEN BY ASSESSEE. 19. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 IS ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESS ING OFFICER TOWARDS CASH CREDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSING OFFICER NOTIC ED THAT ASSESSEE IS MAINTAINING SB ACCOUNT WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, SEMBUDOSS STREET, CHENNAI AND ON VARIOUS DATES CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE AMOUNTING TO 65,000/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITIONS TOWARDS CASH DEPOSITS O N THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT SATISFACTORILY EXPLAIN ED SOURCE OF INCOME FOR CASH CREDITS FOUND IN BANK ACCOUNT. SI MILARLY, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITIONS TOWARDS CREDI TS FOUND IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES AMOUNTING TO 48 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 1,10,000/- ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRO DUCED ANY EVIDENCE TO VERIFY SOURCE FOR CREDIT APPEARING IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDING S, ASSESSEE HAS FILED CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH HAS BE EN FORWARDED TO ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS HAS ACCEPTED SOURCE OF IN COME FOR CASH DEPOSITS FOUND IN BANK ACCOUNT FOR 65,000/-, HOWEVER, REITERATED HIS ARGUMENTS INSOFAR AS CREDIT FOUND IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. THE LEA RNED CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING RELEVANT SUBMISSIONS HAS DELETED ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS CREDITS FOUND IN SB ACCOUNT WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, HOWEVER, CONFIRME D ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS CREDIT IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO 1,10,000/-. 20. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIAL AV AILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LEARNED AR FOR ASSESSEE EXCEPT MAKING ARGUMENT THAT ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS CREDIT FOUND IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT IS NOT MADE OUT OF SEIZED 49 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 MATERIAL HAS FAILED TO FILE ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE S OURCE OF INCOME FOR CREDIT AMOUNTING TO 1,10,000/- . THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO ERROR IN T HE FINDINGS RECORDED BY LEARNED CIT(A) TO SUSTAIN ADDITION MADE BY A.O TOWARDS CREDITS FOUND IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO 1,10,000/- AND HENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD FIN DINGS RECORDED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND REJECT GROUNDS TAKE N BY ASSESSEE. 21. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 IS ADDITION MADE BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER TOWARDS CASH CREDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT AMOUNTI NG TO 6,50,000/- DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS, ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAS AN SB ACCOUNT WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, SEMBUDOSS STREET, CHENNAI . IT WAS FURTHER NOTED THAT ON VARIOUS DATES CASH DEPOSITS A MOUNTING TO 6,50,000/- WERE MADE, AFTER IMMEDIATELY CHEQUES W ERE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF VARIOUS PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE E XPLAINED THAT AN AMOUNT OF 5,00,000/- BROUGHT BY WAY OF TRANSFER HAS BEEN RETURNED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH 50 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY ASSESSEE AND ACCORDING TO HIM, SOURCE OF INCOME OF CASH DEPOSITS WERE UNEXPLAINED , AND ACCORDINGLY MADE ADDITION OF 6,50,000/-. 22. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) AND FILED VARIOUS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FORWARDED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY ASSESSEE TO THE ASSESSING OFFI CER FOR HIS COMMENTS. DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSES SING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED SOURCE OF INCOME FOR CASH DEP OSIT OF 1,50,000/- AND IN RESPECT OF REMAINING CASH DEPO SIT OF 5.00 LAKHS, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REITERATED HIS OBSERV ATIONS MADE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THEREF ORE, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED RELIEF TO THE EXTENT O F 1,50,000/- AND BALANCE AMOUNT OF 5,00,000/- HAS BEEN CONFIRMED. 23. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIAL AV AILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. ON VERIFICATION OF DETAILS FILED BY ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT EXCEPT STATING THAT ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER T OWARDS CASH 51 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 DEPOSIT IS NOT MADE OUT OF SEIZED MATERIAL AND IS O N THE BASIS OF RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILE D ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE SOURCE OF INCOME FOR CASH DEPOSIT OF 5,00,000/- MADE IN UNION BANK OF INDIA. THEREFORE , WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO ERROR IN THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY LEARNED CIT(A) TO CONFIRM ADDITIONS MA DE BY ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS CASH DEPOSIT WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA AMOUNTING TO 5,00,000/- . HENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD FINDINGS OF LEARNED CIT(A) AND REJECT GROUN D TAKEN BY ASSESSEE. 24. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IS VARIOUS ADDITIONS MADE B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS COMPOUNDING FEE, CASH CR EDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT , CREDIT IN PERSONAL TRIAL BALANCE, CR EDIT IN PERSONAL BOOK AND REMUNERATION RECEIVED FROM M/S. VIKAS BE ARING AND WIRES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION OF 1,000/- TOWARDS COMPOUNDING FEE ON THE GROUND THAT SAID EX PENDITURE IS IN PENAL NATURE WHICH CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS DEDUC TION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO MADE ADDITION TOWARDS C REDIT IN 52 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES AMOUNTING TO 4,51,096/- ON THE GROUND THAT NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRODUCED TO VERIFY SOURCE OF CREDIT APPEARING IN CA PITAL ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO MADE ADDITION OF 1,00,000/- TOWARDS CASH CREDIT FOUND IN SB ACCOUNT WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, SEMBUDOSS STREET, CHENNAI ON THE GROUND T HAT NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FILED TO PROVE SOURCE OF INCOME F OR CASH DEPOSITS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION OF 37,500/- IN RESPECT OF CREDIT IN PERSONAL TRIAL B ALANCE ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FILE ANY EVIDE NCE TO PROVE CREDIT BY IDENTIFICATION OF CREDITORS. LIKEWISE, TH E ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION OF 79,392/- TOWARDS DIFFERENCE IN REMUNERATION ADMITTED BY ASSESSEE AND PROFIT FROM M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. ON APPEAL, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS AFFIRMED FINDINGS RECORDED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. 25. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIAL AV AILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE EXCEPT STATING THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE VA RIOUS 53 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ADDITIONS WITHOUT ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH HAS FAILED TO FILE ANY EVIDENCES T O PROVE SOURCE OF INCOME FOR CASH CREDITS FOUND IN SB ACCOU NT, AND ALSO FAILED TO EXPLAIN CREDIT IN PERSONAL TRIAL BALANCE, CREDIT IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND DIFFERENCE IN REMUNERATION RECEIVED FR OM M/S. VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FA ILED TO EXPLAIN HOW DEDUCTION CAN BE ALLOWED TOWARDS COMPOU NDING FEE OF 1,000/-. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO ERROR IN THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY LEARN ED CIT(A) TO CONFIRM ADDITIONS ON VARIOUS ACCOUNTS. WE ARE INCL INED TO UPHOLD FINDINGS OF LEARNED CIT(A) AND REJECT GROUND S TAKEN BY ASSESSEE. 26. THE NEXT COMMON ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATION FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 & 2004- 05 IS PROTECTIVE ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS DEPRECIATION ON C AR AND FINANCE CHARGES ON CAR LOAN. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HAS DISALLOWED EXPENSES CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD DEPRECI ATION ON CAR AND INTEREST PAID ON CAR LOAN ON THE GROUND TH AT ASSESSEE IS ONLY A NAME LENDER IN RESPECT OF OWNERSHIP OF M /S.VIKAS 54 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 BEARING AND WIRES WAS IN FACT, CARRIED OUT BY MR . DINESH R MEHTA AND ACCORDINGLY, SUBSTANTIVE ADDITION HAS BEE N MADE IN THE HANDS OF MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND PROTECTIVE ADD ITION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE, BECAUSE ASSESSE E WAS LEGAL OWNER OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. 27. ON APPEAL, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED ADDITIO NS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. 28. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIAL AV AILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW ALONG WITH VARIOUS ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY LEARNED CO UNSEL FOR ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT IT WAS A CASE OF ASSESSEE TH AT UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN COMPUTER SYSTE M IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES WAS BELONGED TO MR. DINESH R MEHTA AND THE TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN R EGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WAS CARRIED OUT BY HIM AS PROPRIET OR OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. WE FURTHER HELD THAT U NACCOUNTED TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M/S. A &N ENGINEERING COMPANY IS NOT BELONGED TO ASSESSEE AND SAME CANNOT BE ADDED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN THE HANDS OF 55 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 ASSESSEE, BECAUSE MR.DINESH R MEHTA HAS OWNED UP UNACCOUNTED BUSINESS RELATED STOCK AND RECEIVABLES IN THE NAME OF M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. ONCE THE TR ANSACTIONS RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M/S. A&N ENGINEERIN G COMPANY IS HELD TO BE NOT TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF A SSESSEE, DEPRECIATION ON CAR AND FINANCE CHARGES CANNOT BE T AXED ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE, WHEN SU BSTANTIVE ADDITION WAS MADE IN THE NAME OF MR.DINESH R MEHTA. THE LEARNED CIT(A), WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS SIM PLY CONFIRMED ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER. HENCE, WE DIR ECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE PROTECTIVE ADDITION M ADE TOWARDS DEPRECIATION ON CAR AND FINANCE CHARGES ON CAR LOA N IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE FOR BOTH ASSESSMENT YEARS. 29. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION F OR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 IS TOWARDS OTHER ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF CASH CREDIT IN U NION BANK OF INDIA, CREDIT IN PERSONAL BOOKS AND DIFFERENCE IN R EMUNERATION FROM M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES, COIMBATORE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITIONS TOWARDS CRE DIT IN PERSONAL BOOK AMOUNTING TO 1,86,225/- ON THE GROUND THAT 56 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 NO EXPLANATION HAS BEEN FILED TO VERIFY SOURCE OF CREDIT APPEARING IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HAS ALSO MADE ADDITIONS TOWARDS CASH DEPOSIT OF 2,10,000/- FOUND IN SB ACCOUNT MAINTAINED AT UNION BANK OF INDIA. THE A SSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO MADE ADDITION TOWARDS DIFFERENCE IN REMUNERATION RECEIVED FROM M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES. LIKEWISE, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITIONS TO WARDS SUNDRY CREDITORS APPEARING IN BOOKS OF M/S.VIKAS BE ARING AND WIRES ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE WAS ONLY NAME LE NDER AND MR.DINESH R MEHTA IS REAL OWNER OF PROPRIETARY BUS INESS, THEREFORE, HE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN IDENT ITY OF SUNDRY CREDITORS. 30. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE LEARNE D CIT(A) AND FILED VARIOUS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FORW ARDED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY ASSESSEE TO THE ASS ESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE HIS REMAND REPORT HAS ACCEPTED SOURCE OF CREDITS IN PER SONAL BOOK FOR RS.15,887/- ON THE GROUND THAT SAME REPRESENTS INTEREST 57 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 PAID ON CAR LOAN. AS REGARDS CREDITS IN SB ACCOUNT, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED SOURCE FOR INCOME OF 1,03,360/- BECAUSE, THE SAME IS OUT OF COMMISSION NOT OFFERED TO TAX. INSOFAR AS OTHER ADDITIONS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REITERATED HIS OBSERVATIONS MADE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THE BASIS OF REMAND REPORT ALLOW ED PARTIAL RELIEF IN RESPECT OF CASH CREDIT FOUND IN SB ACCOU NT AND ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS CREDIT FROM PERSONAL BOOK. H OWEVER, IN RESPECT OF BALANCE WITH M/S. A&N ENGINEERING COMPA NY, INTEREST ON CREDITS AND REMUNERATION UPHELD ADDITI ONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER . 31. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIALS A VAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEA RING EXCEPT STATING THAT ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER ARE NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING TH E COURSE OF SEARCH, HAS FAILED TO FILE ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE SO URCE OF INCOME FOR CREDITS FOUND IN SB ACCOUNT AND PERSONA L ACCOUNT AND ALSO FAILED TO EXPLAIN DIFFERENCE IN REMUNERAT ION . WE ARE, THEREFORE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT LEARNED CIT(A ) WAS RIGHT 58 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 IN CONFIRMING ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS CASH CREDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT, CREDIT IN PERSONAL BOO K AND DIFFERENCE IN REMUNERATION. HENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND REJECT GROU NDS TAKEN BY ASSESSEE . 32. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR CONSIDERATION F OR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 IS TOWARDS VARIOUS ADDIT IONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND DU RING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, PROFIT FROM M/S.VIKAS BEARING AN D WIRES, NEW SUNDRY CREDITORS AND SUNDRY CREDITORS WITH TRAN SACTIONS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN SATISF ACTORILY SOURCE OF INCOME FOR CASH DEPOSITS FOUND IN BANK ACCOUNT AND ALSO FAILED TO FILE IDENTITY AND GENUINENESS OF TRANSACT IONS WITH REGARD TO SUNDRY CREDITORS. AS REGARDS CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDI TIONS ON PROTECTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE NAME OF 59 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES WAS BELONGED TO MR.DI NESH R MEHTA. 33. ON APPEAL, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS AFFIRMED PROTECT IVE ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, PROFIT FROM M/S.VIKAS BEARING AND WIRES AND NEW SUNDRY CREDITORS AND SUNDRY CREDITOR S WITH TRANSACTIONS. HOWEVER, ENHANCED ADDITIONS MADE TOWA RDS CASH CREDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT TO 2,32,900/- ON THE BASIS OF REASSESSMENT OF ASSESSING OFFICER, WHERE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FILE SOURCE OF INCOME FOR CASH DEPOSITS OF 1,35,000/-. 34. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED MATERIALS A VAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIE S BELOW. WE FIND THAT IN PRECEDING PARAGRAPH IN RESPECT OF UNAC COUNTED RECEIVABLES AND STOCK IN TRADE PERTAINS TO M/S.VIK AS BEARING AND WIRES WAS HELD TO BE NOT TAXABLE EVEN ON PROT ECTIVE BASIS IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE BECAUSE SUBSTANTIVE ADDIT ION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE HANDS OF MR.DINESH R MEHTA ON THE BASIS OF VARIOUS INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE CO URSE OF 60 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 SEARCH COUPLED WITH STATEMENTS RECORDED FROM MR.D INESH R MEHTA, THE ASSESSEE AND OTHER EMPLOYEES OF GROUP , ONCE PROTECTIVE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS STOCK IN TRADE REC EIVABLES IS HELD TO BE NOT TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE , THE OTHER PROTECTIVE ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, PROFIT FROM M/S.VIKAS BEARING AN D WIRES AND NEW SUNDRY CREDITORS AND SUNDRY CREDITORS WITH TR ANSACTIONS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. THER EFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON PROTECTIVE BASIS TOWARDS CASH FOUND AND OTHER ADDITIONS. WE R EVERSE FINDINGS OF LEARNED CIT(A) AND DIRECT ASSESSING O FFICER TO DELETE PROTECTIVE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, PROFIT FROM VBW AND NEW SUNDRY CR EDITORS AND SUNDRY CREDITORS WITH TRANSACTIONS. HOWEVER, I N RESPECT OF ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS CASH CREDIT IN BANK ACCOUNT OF UNION BANK OF INDIA, ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN SOUR CE OF INCOME FOR CASH DEPOSITS AMOUNTING TO 3,67,900/- WITH ANY EVIDENCES. THEREFORE, WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD FINDINGS OF LE ARNED CIT(A) AND REJECT ARGUMENTS OF ASSESSEE . AS REGARDS INTER EST RECEIVED 61 ITA NOS.168 TO 173/CHNY/2020 AMOUNTING TO 26,400, IT IS ADMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT ADMITTED INTEREST INCOME IN THE RETURN FILED FOR RE LEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE, ADDITION MADE TOWARDS INTEREST INCOME IS UPHELD. 35. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS FILED BY ASSESSEE FOR AS SESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000, 2001-02 TO 2005-06 ARE TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND FEBRUARY, 2021 SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) ( G.MANJUNATHA ) ! $ / JUDICIAL MEMBER $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ! /CHENNAI, ' /DATED, 2 ND FEBRUARY, 2021 DS )* +* /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. , () /CIT(A) 4. , /CIT 5. * 1 /DR 6. /GF .