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

ITA 1764/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6178 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M SITARAM
• Assessee Lawyers: P MURALI MOHAN RAO
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Documents seized
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 147; 148; 6; 132; 139

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1764HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SHRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL, HYDERABAD PAN ACDPA7827Q VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CIRCLE 6(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P. MURALI MOHAN RAO REVENUE BY : SHRI M. SITARAM DATE OF HEARING : 22-12-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08-01-2016 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF CIT(A)-III, HYDERABAD DATED 13 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 FOR THE AY 2007-08. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE, THE ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL, DERIVES INCOME FROM BUSINESS. HE FILED HIS RETURN O F INCOME FOR THE AY 2007-08 ON 13 TH NOVEMBER, 2013. THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT ON 23/12/2009 U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A DETERMINING TH E TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 3,30,551/- BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 30,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWALS. 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS RELATING TO THE SAID ADDITION ARE, A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 19 61 (IN SHORT ACT) WAS CONDUCTED IN THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH DOCUMENTS RELATING TO T HE ASSESSEE WERE SEIZED VIDE ANNEXURE A/SAS/02, DATED 07/11/2007. I N RESPONSE TO THE STATUTORY NOTICES, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE FOLLOWING RETURNS OF INCOME: 2 ITA NO. 1764 /HYD/2013 SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL AY RETURN FILED ON INCOME ADMITTED 2002-03 29/10/2008 84,070 2003-04 29/10/2008 77,930 2004-05 29/10/2008 85,820 2005-06 29/10/2008 1,36,130 2006-07 29/10/2008 (-)3,43,788 2007-08 29/10/2008 2,70,550 2008-09 22/09/2008 1,55,58,570 3.1 AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE THE FOLLOWI NG HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWALS ALONG WITH HIS FATHER AND UNCLE: A.Y. WITHDRAWALS IN ANIL KUMAR AGARWAL WITHDRAWALS IN SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL WITHDRAWALS IN CHANDERPAL AGARWAL TOTAL 2002-03 5,000 17,610 11,010 33,620 2003-04 7,410 26,100 8,000 41,510 2004-05 9,902 27,050 36,164 73,116 2005-06 37,981 23,725 25,665 87,371 2006-07 11,617 33,000 15,112 59,729 2007-08 19,750 27,319 24,000 71,069 2008-09 19,574 20,000 22,050 61,804 3.2 SINCE THE WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE VERY LOW, THE AO MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.30,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF L OW HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWALS. 4. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN AP PEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). 5. BEFORE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT SINCE HE WAS RESIDING WITH HIS TWO SONS, WHO ALSO HAD HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWALS, THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT FOR HIM TO MAKE ANY MORE HOUSEHO LD WITHDRAWALS. AS SUCH, THE HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWALS WERE ADEQUATE AN D IN THE ABSENCE OF CONCRETE EVIDENCE, THE ADDITION MADE SHO ULD BE DELETED. 3 ITA NO. 1764 /HYD/2013 SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSE E, THE CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE ADDITION FOLLOWING THE DECISION IN TH E CASE OF ANIL AGARWAL VIDE ITA NO. 0457/2009-10. 7. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1 . THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEI. A.O DIS 14 3(3) LW.S. 153A OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS 30,000/- MADE TOWARDS LOW HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWALS. 3. THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION O FRS.30,000/- WITHOUT MAKING ANY INQUIRY AS TO THE STANDARD OF L IVING OF THE APPELLANT. 4. THE LD CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FAC T THAT THE AO'S ADDITION IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE AND IS MADE ON RA NDOM CALCULATIONS. 7.1 IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL GROUNDS RELYING ON THE DECISIO N OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD. VS. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC): 1. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FAC T THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 143(3) R WS 153A OF THE ACT WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOU ND DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUND, THE LD. C IT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT MATERIAL FOUND DURING TH E COURSE OF SEARCH AT THE PREMISE OF SEARCH PARTY DID NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES, WE ADMIT THE SAID ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 9. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE IS SUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION O F THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF SHRI ANIL KUMAR A GARWAL AND SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL IN ITA NOS. 1755/HYD/2013 TO 176 0/HYD/2013 AND ITA NOS. 1762 & 1763/HYD/2013 VIDE ORDER DATED 21/08/2015, A COPY OF WHICH IS FILED ON RECORD. 4 ITA NO. 1764 /HYD/2013 SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL 10. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED ON THE OR DERS OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AN D PERUSED THE MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD AS WELL AS THE ORDERS OF R EVENUE AUTHORITIES. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS SQUARELY COVER ED BY THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, HYDERABAD BENCH IN CASE OF SRI ANIL KU MAR AGARWAL AND SRI CHANDERPAL AGARWAL (SUPRA) WHEREIN THE COORDINA TE BENCH HELD AS FOLLOWS: 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDER SHEET PLACED ON RECORD. EVEN THOUGH, THE AO DID MENTION THAT THER E WAS SOME INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, THERE IS NO SATISFACTION RECORDED ABOUT THE EXPLA NATION OF THE INCOME FROM THE PERSON WHO WAS SEARCHED AND HOW THE DOCUMENT IS RELEVANT IN ASSESSEE'S CASE. THE ORDER SHEET ENTRY ONLY INDICATE THAT 'DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH INCRIMINATING MATERIAL REGARDING UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS F OUND'. THIS STATEMENT IS COMMON FOR BOTH ASSESSEES. THIS BLAND STATEMENT CAN NOT B E CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTION FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS 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 ORDERS ALSO, THERE IS NO DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL OR INCOMES TO BE ASSESSED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C . PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153C ARE AS UNDER: '153C. (1) [NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SECTION 139, SECTION 147, SECTION 148, SECTION 149, SECTION 151 AND SECTION 153, WHE RE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT,-- (A) ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABL E ARTICLE OR THING, SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED, BELONGS TO; OR (B) ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS, SEIZED OR R EQUISITIONED, PERTAINS OR PERTAIN TO, OR ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN, RELATES TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153A , THEN, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS , SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED SHALL BE HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON] [AND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER SHA LL PROCEED AGAINST EACH SUCH 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 ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS S EIZED OR REQUISITIONED HAVE A BEARING ON THE DETERMINATION OF THE TOTAL INCOME O F SUCH OTHER PERSON FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTIO N (1) OF SECTION 153A ] : PROVIDED THAT IN CASE OF SUCH OTHER PERSON, THE RE FERENCE TO THE DATE OF INITIATION OF THE SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OR MAKING OF REQUISITION UNDER SECTION 132A IN THE SECOND PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153A SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS REFERENCE TO THE DATE OF RECEIVING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASS ETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OT HER PERSON : 5 ITA NO. 1764 /HYD/2013 SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL PROVIDED FURTHER THAT THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY B Y RULES MADE BY IT AND PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE, SPECIFY THE CLASS OR CLASSES OF CASES IN RESPECT OF SUCH OTHER PERSON, IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL NOT B E REQUIRED TO ISSUE NOTICE FOR ASSESSING OR REASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME FOR SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREV IOUS YEAR IN WHICH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITION IS MADE EXCEPT IN CASES W HERE ANY ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT HAS ABATED. (2) WHERE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED AS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1) HAS OR HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON AFTER THE DUE DATE FOR FURNISHING THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS Y EAR IN WHICH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED UNDER SECTION 132 OR REQUISITION 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 HIM, OR (B) A RETURN OF INCOME HAS BEEN FURNISHED BY SUCH OTHER PERSON BUT NO NOTICE UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 143 HAS BEEN SERVED AND LIMITATION OF SERVING THE NOTI CE UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 143 HAS EXPIRED, OR (C) ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT, IF ANY, HAS BEEN M ADE, BEFORE THE DATE OF RECEIVING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON , SUCH ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ISSUE THE NOTICE AND ASSESS OR REASSESS TOTAL INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PERSON OF SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR IN THE MANNER PROVIDED IN SECTION 153A . 19. SUBSTITUTED FOR 'NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONT AINED IN SECTION 139 , SECTION 147 , SECTION 148 , SECTION 149 , SECTION 151 AND SECTION 153 , 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 REQUISITIONED BE LONGS 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 SHALL BE HANDED OVE R TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON' BY THE FINANCE ACT , 2015, W.E.F. 1-6-2015. 20. SUBSTITUTED FOR 'AND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER SH ALL PROCEED AGAINST EACH SUCH OTHER PERSON AND ISSUE SUCH OTHER PERSON NOTICE AND ASSE SS OR REASSESS INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PERSON IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 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 INC RIMINATING MATERIAL AO SHOULD COME TO A SATISFACTION WHILE INITIATING PROCEEDINGS. TH E HON'BLE AP HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S. SHETTYS PHARMACEUTICALS & BIOLOGICALS LTD. IN ITTA NO. 662 OF 2014 DATED 26-11-2014 (SUPRA) HAS CONSIDERED SIMILAR FACTS AN D HELD AS UNDER: 'THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL IN THIS CASE DID NOT ACCEPT THE INITIATION OF THE ACTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). THIS ACTION HAS TO BE TAKEN AGAINST A THIRD PARTY IN RESPECT OF THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL BROUGHT OUT IN CONNECTION WITH SEARCH AND SEIZURE CONDUCTED ON ANOTHER PARTY SECTION 6 ITA NO. 1764 /HYD/2013 SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL 153C OF THE ACT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THE ASSESSING OF FICER MUST BE SATISFIED THAT SUCH ACTION IS REQUIRED TO BE INITIATED. SRI NARASIMHA SARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPEL LANT, SUBMITS THAT THE WORD RECORDING SATISFACTION IS NOT A PRE-CONDITION FOR THE OBJECT OF THE AFORESAID SECTION. IN ANY EVENT, FROM A READING OF THE ORDER PASSED BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER TO INITIATE ACTION, IF IT EMERGES THAT SATISFACTION IS DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN ARRIVED AT, MERE NON-USE OF THE WORD OF SATISFACTION DOES NOT VITIATE THE ACTION. THE ARGUMENT APPARENTLY IS VERY ATTRACTIVE, BUT TH E LAW IS OTHERWISE AND THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL HAS CORRECTLY APPLIED. WE THEREFORE APPRO PRIATELY SET OUT SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. 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 153 , WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS SATISFIED THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR D OCUMENTS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BELONGS OR BELONG TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSO N REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153A , THEN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED SHALL BE HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON AND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL PROCEED AGAINST EACH SUCH 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 ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED HAVE A BEARING ON THE DETERMINATION OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF SUCH OTHER PERSON FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS REFERRED TO IN SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 153A . (EMPHASIS SUPPLIED) IT IS THEREFORE CLEAR THAT FI RSTLY SATISFACTION HAS TO BE RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER WHO CONDUCTED SEARCH, THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE AR TICLE OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BELONGS OR BELON G TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153A OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICT ION OVER THIRD PARTY ON RECEIPT OF THE SEIZED MATERIAL OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR DOCUMENT B EING HANDED OVER TO HIM SHALL RECORD HIS OWN SATISFACTION AFTER EXAMINING THE SA ME INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT BEING INFLUENCED BY THE SATISFACTION OF THE SEIZING OFFI CER. IN OTHER WORDS IT IS NOT AN AUTOMATIC ACTION. WE FIND SATISFACTION OF TWO OFFICERS IS MI SSING. IN THIS CONNECTION WE SET OUT THE TEXT OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH I S AS FOLLOWS. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S. 132 WAS CARRIE D OUT IN THE GROUP CASE OF DR. T. YADHAIAH GOUD AND OTHERS ON 2532010. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATION DOCUMENTS BELONGING TO SHETTY PHARMACEUTICALS & BI OLOGICAL LTD., HAS BEEN SEIZED. HENCE IT IS CONSIDERED TO INITIATE PR OCEEDING U/S. 153C OF THE I.T.ACT. THE AFORESAID SECTION MANDATES RECORDING OF SATISF ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER(S) IS A PRE-CONDITION FOR INVOKING JURISDICTION AND IT I S NOT A MERE FORMALITY BECAUSE RECORDING OF SATISFACTION POSTULATES APPLICATION OF MIND CON SCIOUSLY AS THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED MUST BE BELONGING TO THE ANY OTHER PERSON OTHER THAN TH E PERSON REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153- A OF THE ACT. IT IS CONTENDED THAT THE SAME ASSESSIN G OFFICER IS INVOLVED IN THE MATTER. THIS FACT DOES NOT DISPENSE WITH ABOVE REQUIREMENT . IT IS SETTLED POSITION OF LAW THAT WHEN A THING IS TO BE DONE IN ONE PARTICULAR MANNE R UNDER LAW THIS HAS TO BE DONE IN THAT MANNER ALONE AND NOT OTHER WAY (SEE NAZIR AHM ED V. KING EMPEROR). WE THINK THE 7 ITA NO. 1764 /HYD/2013 SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL LEARNED TRIBUNAL HAS CORRECTLY FOLLOWED THE PRINCI PLE. WE DO NOT FIND ANY ELEMENT OF LAW TO BE DECIDED'. 8. FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE JURIS DICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE ABOVE CASE, WE NOTICE THAT THERE IS NEITHER ANY SATISFACTION R ECORDED BY THE AO NOR THERE IS ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL RELEVANT FOR MAKING ASSESSM ENTS IN THIS CASE. THEREFORE, THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C ITSELF IS BAD IN LAW. THEREFORE, CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS ARE BAD IN LAW AND ORDERS ARE TO BE CA NCELLED. 9. EVEN ON MERITS, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR E STIMATING THE LOW WITHDRAWALS ON ASSUMPTIONS AND PRESUMPTIONS, WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY BASIS. IN VIEW OF THAT ALSO, THE ADDITION MADE IN ALL THE YEARS ABOUT THE LOW WITHD RAWALS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. THEREFORE, ON MERITS ALSO ASSESSEE HAS A GOOD CASE AND ADDITIONS SO MADE ARE TO BE DELETED. THAT LEAVES US WITH ONE MORE ISSUE OF ADD ITION OF RS. 74,980/- RECEIVED DURING THE AY. 2002-03. THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 74,980/- WAS R ECEIVED FROM A FRIEND. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS WORKING AS SOFTWARE EN GINEER IN UNITED KINGDOM (UK) DURING THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 2000 TO OCTOBER 2001 A ND 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 CAPIT AL ACCOUNT AND TREATED AS 'INCOME OF ASSESSEE'. AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF AO, AN D CIT(A), THEY ONLY DISBELIEVED ASSESSEE'S VERSION. SINCE THIS ISSUE DOES NOT ARIS E OUT OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AND AS ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE AMOUNT AS A RECEIPT IN 2002-03 ITSELF IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ADDITION CANNO T BE MADE IN THE PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C, WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE TO CONTRARY TO DISBELIE VE ASSESSEE'S CONTENTIONS. BE THAT AS IT MAY, AS WE HAVE ALREADY HELD THAT INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C ARE ITSELF BAD IN LAW, THESE ISSUES BECOME ACADEMIC IN NATURE. 10. ASSESSEE RELIED ON COORDINATE BENCH DECISION I N THE CASE OF VINOD KUMAR AGARWAL, ANOTHER ASSESSEE'S GROUP CASE. THEREIN ASSESSMENTS WERE MADE U/S. 153A AND PARAMETERS FOR CONSIDERING THE JURISDICTION ARE DI FFERENT. IN THIS CASE WE HAVE ALREADY EXAMINED THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE LIGHT OF JURISDICT ION HIGH COURT JUDGMENT. FOLLOWING THE SAME, THE PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153C INITIATED IN THIS ASSESSEE'S CASE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEE'S CONTENTIONS ARE ACCEPTED. THE IMPUGNED ORDERS ARE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE. 11. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. AS THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS MATERIALLY IDEN TICAL TO THAT OF THE SAID CASE DECIDED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH, RESPECTF ULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DIRE CT THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD WI THDRAWALS. 8 ITA NO. 1764 /HYD/2013 SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL 12. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JANAURY, 2016 SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) VICE PRESIDENT A CCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 8 TH JANUARY, 2016 KV COPY TO:- 1) SRI SATYANARAYANA AGARWAL, C/O P. MURALI & CO., CAS., 6-3-655/2/3,1 ST FLOOR, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD 500 082 2) ACIT, CIRCLE 6(1), HYDERABAD 3) CIT(A)-III, HYDERABAD 4) CIT-II, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., H YDERABAD.