Sri Chanderpal Agarwal, Hyderabad V. Asst.CIT,Circle 6(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1762/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1816 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 18-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-12-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T VENKAT REDDY
• Assessee Lawyers: P MURALI MOHAN RAO
• Keywords: Gift; Search and seizure; Question of law; Documents seized
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. ASST. YEAR APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1755/HYD/2013 2002-03 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL, HYDERABAD [PAN: AAKPA5812C] ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD 1756/HYD/2013 2003-04 1757/HYD/2013 2004-05 1758/HYD/2013 2005-06 1759/HYD/2013 2006-07 1760/HYD/2013 2007-08 1762/HYD/2013 2007-08 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL, HYDERABAD [PAN: AAKPA8592N] ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD 1763/HYD/2013 2008-09 FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI P. MURALI MOHAN RAO, AR FOR REVENUE : SHRI T. VENKAT REDDY, DR DATE OF HEARING : 18-08-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21-08-2015 O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE APPEALS ARE ARISING OUT OF COMMON SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION CONDUCTED IN THE PREMISES OF SHRI LAXMINA RAYAN AGARWAL AND SHRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL ON 07-11-2007. SHRI ANI L KUMAR AGARWAL IS YOUNGER SON OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN AGARWAL AND SHR I CHANDERPAL AGARWAL IS THE ELDER SON OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN AGARW AL. CONSEQUENT TO THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION IN THE HANDS OF SH RI SATYANARAYAN AGARWAL, PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C OF THE INCOME TAX AC T [ACT] WERE INITIATED IN THE ABOVE TWO ASSESSEES CASES. IN AL L THE IMPUGNED I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 2 -: ASSESSMENT YEARS, ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) MADE ADDIT ION TOWARDS LOW WITHDRAWALS AS UNDER: S.NO. NAME ASST. YEAR AMOUNT (RS.) 1. ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL 2002-03 25,000 2. ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL 2003-04 25,000 3. ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL 2004-05 30,000 4. ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL 2005-06 30,000 5. ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL 2006-07 30,000 6. ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL 2007-08 30,000 7. CHANDERPAL AGARWAL 2007-08 30,000 8. CHANDERPAL AGARWAL 2008-09 30,000 IN ADDITION, THERE WAS ONE MORE ISSUE OF UN-EXPLAI NED GIFT IN THE HANDS OF SHRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL IN AY. 2002-03 OF RS. 74,980/-. 2. ASSESSEE CONTENDED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT PR OCEEDINGS U/S. 153C DOES NOT EMPOWER ADDITION OF UN-EXPLAINED/LOW WITHDRAWALS AND ALSO THE MATTERS WHICH ARE ALREADY SETTLED IN THE A SSESSMENT YEARS. HOWEVER, LD. CIT(A) DID NOT CONSIDER THE ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS AND DISMISSED THE APPEALS IN ALL THE IMPUGNED YEARS. 3. ASSESSEE APART FROM RAISING VARIOUS GROUNDS CONT ESTING THE ADDITIONS MADE, ALSO RAISED ADDITIONAL GROUNDS COMM ONLY IN ALL THE CASES AS UNDER: I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 3 -: 9. WE WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THAT AS PER THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN THE CASE O F NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD., V. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 ( SC) THE ITAT HAS JURISDICTION TO EXAMINE THE QUESTION OF LAW WHI CH THOUGH NOT AROSE BEFORE THE AO BUT AROSE BEFORE THE ITAT FOR T HE FIRST TIME. 10. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 153C OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04, THERE BEIN G NO SATISFACTION RECORDED BY HIM AS WELL AS BY THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE COMPANY SEARCHED. 11. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ANNULLED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER APPRECIATING THAT INVOKING OF THE PROVISIONS U/S. 153C WITHOUT RECORDING SATISFACTION BY HIM AS WELL AS BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE SEARCHED PARTY BECOMES INVALID AS HELD BY THE HON'BLE AP HIGH COUR T IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S. SHETTYS PHARMACEUTICALS & BIOLOGICA LS LTD. IN ITTA NO. 662 OF 2014 DATED 26-11-2014. 12. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FA CT THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE U/S. 143(3) RWS 153C OF THE ACT WITHOUT THEREBEING ANY I NCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 13. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUND, LD. CIT( A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT MATERIAL FOUND DU RING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT THE PREMISE OF SEARCH PARTY DID NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE C ONSEQUENT TO SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION IN ANOTHER PERSONS CA SE AND NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND. THEREFORE, INITI ATION OF PROCEEDINGS ITSELF ARE PER SE NOT PROPER. HE RELIED ON THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE A P HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S. SHETTYS PHAR MACEUTICALS & BIOLOGICALS LTD. IN ITTA NO. 662 OF 2014 DATED 26-1 1-2014. IT WAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT AO HAS NOT ONLY FAILED IN RE CORDING THE SATISFACTION BUT ALSO HAD NOT USED ANY INCRIMINATIN G MATERIAL IN I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 4 -: ESTIMATING THE LOW WITHDRAWALS. ON BOTH THE COUNTS , THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES ARE NOT VALID. 5. LD. DR WHILE PLACING COPIES OF THE ORDER SHEETS. SUBMITTED THAT THE SATISFACTION NOTE RECORDED DO INDICATE THAT THERE W AS INCRIMINATING MATERIAL PERTAINING TO ASSESSEES. THEREFORE, INITI ATION OF PROCEEDINGS ARE VALID. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE ORDER SHEET PLACED ON RECORD. EVEN THOUGH, THE AO DID MENTION THAT THERE WAS SOME INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, THERE IS NO SATISFACTION RE CORDED ABOUT THE EXPLANATION OF THE INCOME FROM THE PERSON WHO WAS S EARCHED AND HOW THE DOCUMENT IS RELEVANT IN ASSESSEES CASE. THE O RDER SHEET ENTRY ONLY INDICATE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH INCRIMIN ATING MATERIAL REGARDING UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FO UND. THIS STATEMENT IS COMMON FOR BOTH ASSESSEES. THIS BLAND STATEMENT CAN NOT BE CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTION FOR INITIATION OF PRO CEEDINGS U/S 153C AS IT DOES NOT INDICATE THE NATURE OF SEIZED MATERIAL AND HOW INCOME IS ASSESSABLE IN ASSESSEE HANDS. AS SEEN FROM THE ORD ERS ALSO, THERE IS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL OR INCO MES TO BE ASSESSED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C. PROVISIONS O F SECTION 153C ARE AS UNDER: 153C. (1) [ NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SECTION 139, SECTION 147, SECTION 148, SECTION 149, SECTION 151 AND SECTION 1 53, WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT, ( A ) ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE A RTICLE OR THING, SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED, BELONGS TO; OR ( B ) ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS, SEIZED OR REQU ISITIONED, PERTAINS OR PERTAIN TO, OR ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN, RELATES T O, I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 5 -: A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTI ON 153A, THEN, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS, SEIZED OR REQUISITI ONED SHALL BE HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTH ER PERSON ] [AND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL PROCEED AGAINST EACH SUCH OTHER PERSO N AND ISSUE NOTICE AND ASSESS OR REASSESS THE INCOME OF THE OTHER PERSON IN ACCORDAN CE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A, IF, THAT ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED HAVE A BEARING ON TH E DETERMINATION OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PERSON FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESS MENT YEAR OR YEARS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153A] : PROVIDED THAT IN CASE OF SUCH OTHER PERSON, THE REF ERENCE TO THE DATE OF INITIATION OF THE SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OR MAKING OF REQUISITI ON UNDER SECTION 132A IN THE SECOND PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153A S HALL BE CONSTRUED AS REFERENCE TO THE DATE OF RECEIVING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUM ENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURIS DICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON : PROVIDED FURTHER THAT THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY BY RULES MADE BY IT AND PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE, SPECIFY THE CLASS OR CLASS ES OF CASES IN RESPECT OF SUCH OTHER PERSON, IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO ISSUE NOTICE FOR ASSESSING OR REASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME FOR SIX A SSESSMENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVI OUS YEAR IN WHICH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITION IS MADE EXCEPT IN CASES WH ERE ANY ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT HAS ABATED. (2) WHERE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS S EIZED OR REQUISITIONED AS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1) HAS OR HAVE BEEN REC EIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON AFTER TH E DUE DATE FOR FURNISHING THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT T O THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED UNDER SECTION 132 OR REQUISITIO N IS MADE UNDER SECTION 132A AND IN RESPECT OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR (A) NO RETURN OF INCOME HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY SUCH OTHER PERSON AND NO NOTICE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 142 HAS BEEN ISSUED TO H IM, OR (B) A RETURN OF INCOME HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY SUCH O THER PERSON BUT NO NOTICE UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 143 HAS BEEN SERVED AND LIMITATION OF SERVING THE NOTICE UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 143 HAS EXP IRED, OR (C) ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT, IF ANY, HAS BEEN MA DE, BEFORE THE DATE OF RECEIVING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT O R DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURIS DICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON, SUCH ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ISSUE THE NOTICE AND A SSESS OR REASSESS TOTAL INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PERSON OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR IN THE MA NNER PROVIDED IN SECTION 153A. I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 6 -: 19. SUBSTITUTED FOR 'NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTA INED IN SECTION 139, SECTION 147, SECTION 148, SECTION 149, SECTION 151 AND SECTION 1 53, WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED OR REQUISITION ED BELONGS OR BELONG TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153A, THEN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED SHAL L BE HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTH ER PERSON' BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2015, W.E.F. 1-6-2015. 20. SUBSTITUTED FOR 'AND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER SHA LL PROCEED AGAINST EACH SUCH OTHER PERSON AND ISSUE SUCH OTHER PERSON NOTICE AND ASSES S OR REASSESS INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PERSON IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 153A' BY THE FINANCE (NO. 2) ACT, 2014, W.E.F. 1-10-2014. 7. AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ABOVE, IF THERE WAS INCR IMINATING MATERIAL AO SHOULD COME TO A SATISFACTION WHILE INITIATING P ROCEEDINGS. THE HON'BLE AP HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S. S HETTYS PHARMACEUTICALS & BIOLOGICALS LTD. IN ITTA NO. 662 OF 2014 DATED 26-11-2014 (SUPRA) HAS CONSIDERED SIMILAR FACTS AND HELD AS UNDER: THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL IN THIS CASE DID NOT ACCEPT T HE INITIATION OF THE ACTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). THIS ACTION H AS TO BE TAKEN AGAINST A THIRD PARTY IN RESPECT OF THE INCRIMINATI NG MATERIAL BROUGHT OUT IN CONNECTION WITH SEARCH AND SEIZURE CONDUCTED ON ANOTHER PARTY. SECTION 153C OF THE ACT SPECIFICALLY SAYS TH AT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MUST BE SATISFIED THAT SUCH ACTION IS REQUI RED TO BE INITIATED. SRI NARASIMHA SARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELL ANT, SUBMITS THAT THE WORD RECORDING SATISFACTION IS NOT A PRE-CONDITION FOR THE OBJECT OF THE AFORESAID SECTION. IN ANY EVE NT, FROM A READING OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO INI TIATE ACTION, IF IT EMERGES THAT SATISFACTION IS DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN AR RIVED AT, MERE NON-USE OF THE WORD OF SATISFACTION DOES NOT VITIAT E THE ACTION. THE ARGUMENT APPARENTLY IS VERY ATTRACTIVE, BUT THE LAW IS OTHERWISE AND THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL HAS CORRECTLY AP PLIED. WE THEREFORE APPROPRIATELY SET OUT SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 7 -: ASSESSMENT OF INCOME OF ANY OTHER PERSON 153C. (1) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SECTION 139, SECTION 147, SECTION 148, SECTION 149, SECTION 151 AND SECTION 1 53, WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT ANY MONEY, BULL ION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BELONGS OR BELONG TO A PERS ON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153A, THEN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED SHALL B E HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON AND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL PROCEED AGAINST EACH S UCH OTHER PERSON AND ISSUE NOTICE AND ASSESS OR REASSESS THE INCOME OF THE OTHER PERSON IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A, IF, THAT ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT THE BOOKS OF AC COUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED HAVE A BEARING ON THE DETERMINATION OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PER SON FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS REFERRED TO IN SU B- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153A. (EMPHASIS SUPPLIED) IT IS THEREFORE CLEAR THAT FIRSTLY SATISFACTION HAS TO BE RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO CONDUCTED SEARCH, THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THI NG OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BELONG S OR BELONG TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153A OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTI ON OVER THIRD PARTY ON RECEIPT OF THE SEIZED MATERIAL OR BOOKS OF ACCOU NTS OR DOCUMENT BEING HANDED OVER TO HIM SHALL RECORD HIS OWN SATIS FACTION AFTER EXAMINING THE SAME INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT BEING INFL UENCED BY THE SATISFACTION OF THE SEIZING OFFICER. IN OTHER WORDS IT IS NOT AN AUTOMATIC ACTION. WE FIND SATISFACTION OF TWO OFFIC ERS IS MISSING. IN THIS CONNECTION WE SET OUT THE TEXT OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S. 132 WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE GROUP CASE OF DR. T. YADHAIAH GOUD AND OTHERS O N 2532010. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATION DOCUMENTS BEL ONGING TO SHETTY PHARMACEUTICALS & BIOLOGICAL LTD., HAS BEEN SEIZED. HENCE IT IS CONSIDERED TO INITIATE PROCEEDI NG U/S. 153C OF THE I.T.ACT. THE AFORESAID SECTION MANDATES RECORDING OF SATISFA CTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER(S) IS A PRE-CONDITION FOR INV OKING JURISDICTION AND IT IS NOT A MERE FORMALITY BECAUSE RECORDING OF SATISFACTION POSTULATES APPLICATION OF MIND CONSCIOUSLY AS THE D OCUMENTS SEIZED MUST BE BELONGING TO THE ANY OTHER PERSON OTHER THA N THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153-A OF THE ACT. IT IS CON TENDED THAT THE SAME I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 8 -: ASSESSING OFFICER IS INVOLVED IN THE MATTER. THIS F ACT DOES NOT DISPENSE WITH ABOVE REQUIREMENT. IT IS SETTLED POSI TION OF LAW THAT WHEN A THING IS TO BE DONE IN ONE PARTICULAR MANNER UNDER LAW THIS HAS TO BE DONE IN THAT MANNER ALONE AND NOT OTHER W AY (SEE NAZIR AHMED V. KING EMPEROR). WE THINK THE LEARNED TRIBUN AL HAS CORRECTLY FOLLOWED THE PRINCIPLE. WE DO NOT FIND AN Y ELEMENT OF LAW TO BE DECIDED. 8. FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE JURISD ICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE ABOVE CASE, WE NOTICE THAT THERE IS NEITHER ANY SATISFACTION RECORDED BY THE AO NOR THERE IS ANY INCRIMINATING M ATERIAL RELEVANT FOR MAKING ASSESSMENTS IN THIS CASE. THEREFORE, THE IN ITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C ITSELF IS BAD IN LAW. THEREF ORE, CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS ARE BAD IN LAW AND ORDERS ARE TO BE CA NCELLED. 9. EVEN ON MERITS, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR ES TIMATING THE LOW WITHDRAWALS ON ASSUMPTIONS AND PRESUMPTIONS, WITHOU T THERE BEING ANY BASIS. IN VIEW OF THAT ALSO, THE ADDITION MADE IN ALL THE YEARS ABOUT THE LOW WITHDRAWALS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. THEREFORE, ON MERITS ALSO ASSESSEE HAS A GOOD CASE AND ADDITIONS SO MADE ARE TO BE DEL ETED. THAT LEAVES US WITH ONE MORE ISSUE OF ADDITION OF RS. 74,980/- REC EIVED DURING THE AY. 2002-03. THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 74,980/- WAS RECEIVED FROM A FRIEND. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS WORKING AS SOFTWARE ENGINEER IN UNITED KINGDOM (UK) DURING THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 2000 TO OC TOBER 2001 AND BEFORE HE LEFT FOR UK, HE HANDED OVER HIS PERSONAL BELONGINGS TO HIS FRIEND FOR SALE AND THE AMOUNT OF RS. 74,980/- SENT BY HIS FRIEND WAS SHOWN IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND TREATED AS INCOME OF ASSESSEE. AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF AO, AND CIT(A), THEY ONLY DISBELIEVED ASSESSEES VERSION. SINCE THIS ISSUE DOES NOT ARIS E OUT OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AND AS ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN TH E AMOUNT AS A RECEIPT IN 2002-03 ITSELF IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT, W E ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE IN THE PROCEEDINGS U/S . 153C, WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE TO CONTRARY TO DISBELIEVE ASSESSEES CONTE NTIONS. BE THAT AS IT I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 9 -: MAY, AS WE HAVE ALREADY HELD THAT INITIATION OF PRO CEEDINGS U/S. 153C ARE ITSELF BAD IN LAW, THESE ISSUES BECOME ACADEMIC IN NATURE. 10. ASSESSEE RELIED ON COORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN THE CASE OF VINOD KUMAR AGARWAL, ANOTHER ASSESSEES GROUP CASE. THERE IN ASSESSMENTS WERE MADE U/S. 153A AND PARAMETERS FOR CONSIDERING THE JURISDICTION ARE DIFFERENT. IN THIS CASE WE HAVE ALREADY EXAMINE D THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE LIGHT OF JURISDICTION HIGH COURT JUDGMENT. FOLL OWING THE SAME, THE PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C INITIATED IN THIS ASSESSEES CASE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS ARE ACCEPTED. THE IMPUGNED ORDERS ARE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE. 11. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST AUGUST, 2015 SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 21 ST AUGUST, 2015 TNMM I.T.A. NOS. 1755 TO 1760/HYD/13 SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL I.T.A. NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/13 SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL :- 10 - : COPY TO : 1. SRI ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. C/O. P. MURA LI & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 6-3-655/2/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD. 2. SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL, HYDERABAD. C/O. P. MURAL I & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 6-3-655/2/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD. 3. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), H YDERABAD. 4. CIT(APPEALS)-III, HYDERABAD. 5. CIT-II, HYDERABAD. 6. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 7. GUARD FILE.