K.GURUMURTHY, CHENNAI V. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 11(4), CHENNAI

ITA 2922/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4394 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N VISWANATHAN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Peak credit; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 13; 147; 148; 154; 2

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: CHENNAI . . . , ! , & BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 ' ' /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2012-13 & 2011-12 SHRI K. GURUMURTHY, 356-B, WEST AVENUE, MKB NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 039. V . THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-11(4), BSNL BUILDING, GREAMS ROAD, CHENNAI-06. [PAN: AAIPG 7393 J ] ( * /APPELLANT) ( +,* /RESPONDENT) * - / APPELLANT BY : MR.N. VISWANATHAN, ADV. +,* - /RESPONDENT BY : MR.A.R.V.SREENIVASAN, JCIT - /DATE OF HEARING : 29.01.2020 - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.02.2020 / O R D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST TWO SEPARATE APPELLATE ORDER(S) BOTH DATED 21.08.2018 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-13 , CHENNAI ( HEREINAFTER CALLED THE CIT(A)), IN ITA NO. 145/CIT(A)-13/AY2012-13 A ND ITA NO. 145/CIT(A)-13/AY2012-13 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS (AY S) 2012-13 AND 2011-12 RESPECTIVELY , THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BE FORE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD ARISEN FROM TWO SEPARATE ASSESSMENT ORDERS BOTH DATED 10.03.2016 PASSED BY LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER CA LLED THE AO) ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 2 -: : U/S.143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE ACT) FOR AY: 2012-13 AND 2011-12 RESPE CTIVELY. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN MEM O OF APPEAL FILED WITH INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI (HEREIN AFTER CALLED THE TRIBUNAL) FOR AY: 2012-13, READ AS UNDER:- GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR THE AY 2012-13: EXTRACT FROM THE HON. ITO ASSESSMENT ORDER DT. 10.03. 2016 FOR THE AY 2012-13 REF-PAGE 2 PARA 3 DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE AR WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE SOURCES FOR CASH DEPOSITS, CONFORMATION FOR LOAN, D ETAILS OF INTEREST PAID AND COPY OF BANK STATEMENT. IN MEAN TIME, COPIES OF BANK STA TEMENT ARE OBTAINED FROM THE BANK ON REQUEST AND THE BANK STATEMENT WERE EXAMINE D. THE ASSESSEE INFORMED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT HE COULD NOT PROD UCE THE DETAILS FOR CASH DEPOSITS AS THE ACCOUNTANT SUDDENLY LEFT THE SERVIC E. AFTER DISCUSSION, THE ASSESSEE AGREED FOR ADOPTING 'PEAK CREDIT' METHOD T O FIND OUT THE INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS. ACCORDINGLY, PEAK CREDIT WAS WORKED OUT TO RS.3,05,500/- IS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE A SSESSEE. EXTRACT FROM THE HON. CIT(APPEALS} ORDER DT.10.03.201 6 FOR THE AY 2012- 13 REF-PAGE 9 PARA 2 THE AO HAS NOT EXAMINED THE SOURCE OF ABOVE CASH DE POSITS, MORESOEVER, COMPLETE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, EVIDENCES, VARIOUS LEDG ER ACCOUNTS LIKE LOAN ACCOUNTS, JEWEL LOAN ACCOUNT, COMMISSION ACCOUNT, I NTEREST ACCOUNTS COULD NOT BE FURNISHED BEFORE THE APPEAL AUTHORITY, AS THE FACTS REMAINS THAT THE SAME ARE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, SOURCE OF C ASH DEPOSIT AS SUCH COULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIATED WITH EVIDENCES, MOREOVER CONSIDERI NG THE ENTIRE CASH DEPOSIT AS UNEXPLAINED AND NOT GIVING CREDIT FOR WITHDRAWAL FR OM THE BANK ACCOUNTS IS TANTAMOUNT TO INJUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN ALL FAIRNESS IN ABSENCE OF SUPPORTING AND CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCES CONSIDERING PEAK CASH CREDIT AS UNEXPLAINED CASH IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE APPEA RS TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE AND JUST AND PROPER. THUS THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE THAT THE PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS.3,05,500/ - SHALL BE DELETED IN VIEW O F THE ASSESSEE NOW PRODUCING RECONSTRUCTED P&L ACCOUNT, BALANCE SHEET AND CASH B OOK AND BANK BOOK IS FOUND TO BE INCOMPLETE FOR WANT OF DETAILS OF RESPECTIVE LEDGERS IN THE ASSESSEE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. HENCE I CONFIRM THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER TO TREAT PEAK CASH CREDIT AS ARRIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING T HE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR RS.3,05,500/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE HAN DS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON THE ISSUE IS ACCORDINGLY DISMI SSED. 1. THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE HON. ITO IN HIS ASST. ORDER (EXTRACT ABOVE) ARE AS FOLLOWS :- I) BANK STATEMENT WERE EXAMINED. ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 3 -: : II) THE ASSESSEE INFORMED DURING THE COURSE OF HEAR ING THAT HE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE DETAILS FOR CASH DEPOSITS. III) THE ASSESSEE AGREED FOR ADOPTING 'PEAK CREDIT ' METHOD TO FIND OUT THE INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS. IV) ACCORDINGLY, PEAK CREDIT WAS WORKED OUT TO RS. 3,05,500/- IS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, PRIMARILY THE REASON FOR ADDING RS.3.05,500/ - UNDER PEAK CREDIT METHOD, IS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE DETAILS FOR CASH DEPOSITS. 2. THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE HON. CIT (APPEALS) IN HIS APPEAL ORDER (EXTRACT ABOVE) ARE AS FOLLOWS:- I) THE AO HAS NOT EXAMINED THE SOURCE OF ABOVE CAS H DEPOSITS. II) COMPLETE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, EVIDENCES, VARIOUS LEDGER ACCOUNTS LIKE LOAN ACCOUNTS, JEWEL LOAN ACCOUNT, COMMISSION ACCOU NT, INTEREST ACCOUNTS COULD NOT BE FURNISHED BEFORE THE APPEAL AUTHORITY. III) THE FACTS REMAINS THAT THE SAME ARE NOT AVAIL ABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. IV) THEREFORE, SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT AS SUCH COUL D NOT BE SUBSTANTIATED WITH EVIDENCES. V) THEREFORE, IN ALL FAIRNESS IN ABSENCE OF SUPPORTING AND CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCES CONSIDERING PEAK CASH CRE DIT AS UNEXPLAINED CASH IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO BE MOST APP ROPRIATE AND JUST AND PROPER. VI) THUS THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS. 3,05,500/- SHALL BE DELETED IN VIEW OF THE ASSE SSEE NOW PRODUCING RECONSTRUCTED P&L ACCOUNT, BALANCE SHEET AND CASH B OOK AND BANK BOOK IS FOUND TO BE INCOMPLETE FOR WANT OF DETAILS OF RESPE CTIVE LEDGERS IN THE ASSESSEE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. VI) HENCE I CONFIRM THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO TREAT PEAK CASH CREDIT AS ARRIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING T HE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR RS. 3,05,5007- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON THE ISSUE IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 3. GROUNDS OF APPEAL: WE HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT THE HON. CIT (A)-13 IT APPEAR S HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS AS MENTIONED BELOW: I) WITH REFERENCE TO POINT 2(I) ABOVE: A) IN THE REMAND REPORT IN PAGE 2 OF PARA 1 & 2 T HE ASSESSING OFFICERS REMARKS HAS CLEARLY MENTIONED: B) IN PARA 1 THE HON. A.O. HAS MENTIONED THE ASSE SSEE PRODUCED BELOW MENTIONED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR VERIFICATION. ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 4 -: : C) IN PARA 2 THE HON. A.O. HAS MENTIONED 'THE DET AILS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE EXAMINED.' D) THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED INCLUDES THE CASH BOOK AND THE BANK BOOK WHICH WAS VERIFIED BY THE HON. A.O. WITH ALL THE CA SH DEPOSIT ENTRIES IN THE IOB STATEMENTS AND WAS SATISFIED THAT ALL THE CASH DEPO SITS WERE RECONCILED WITH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED. II) WITH REFERENCE TO POINT 2(II) ABOVE: A) THE HON. A.O. DID NOT CALL FOR ANY OTHER RECOR DS AND DOCUMENTS FOR DURING THE REMAND REPORT SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS. B) THE HON. CIT (A)-13 DID NOT CALL FOR ANY RECOR DS/ANY LEDGERS POINTED OUT IN HIS ORDER, DID NOT ISSUE ANY NOTICE FOR HEARING AND DID NOT EXPRESS HIS REQUIREMENT FOR THESE VARIOUS LEDGERS TO COMPLETE THE APPEAL PR OCEEDINGS. III) WITH REFERENCE TO POINT 2(III) ABOVE: THE HON. CIT (A)-13 STATEMENT THAT 'THE FACTS REMA INS (HAT THE SAME ARE NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE' IS PRESUMPTIVE, [AS EXPLAINED IN 2(B) ABOVE] IV) WITH REFERENCE TO POINT 2(IV) ABOVE: THE HON. CIT (A)-13 STATEMENT THAT 'SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT AS SUCH COULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIATED WITH EVIDENCES' IS INCORRECT BECAUSE: A) THE CASH BOOK CLEARLY SHOWS THE EVIDENCES FOR THE SOURCE OF THE CASH DEPOSITS. THE SOURCES FOR CASH DEPOSITS AS PER THE CASH BOOK ARE NAMELY, OPENING CASH BALANCE, BUILDING RENT, TOWER RENT, REMUNERATI ON AND INTEREST ON CAPITAL RECEIVED AS MANAGING PARTNER FROM THE PARTNERSHIP F IRM, BULK CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM THE SAME BANK ETC., B) THE CASH BOOK ENTRIES CLEARLY DEPICTS THE SOUR CE OF CASH DEPOSITS DOES NOT ARISE FROM 'ITEMS LIKE LOAN ACCOUNTS, JEWEL LO AN ACCOUNT, COMMISSION ACCOUNT, INTEREST' AS MENTIONED IN THE CIT (A) ORDE R. V) WITH REFERENCE TO POINT 2(V) ABOVE: THE HON. CIT (A)-13 STATEMENT THAT 'IN ABSENCE OF S UPPORTING AND CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCES CONSIDERING PEAK CASH CREDIT' IS INCORREC T BECAUSE: AS EXPLAINED (IV) (A) & (B) ABOVE THERE ARE SUFFICI ENT SUPPORTING AND CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCES FOR THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK. VI) WITH REFERENCE TO POINT 2(VI) ABOVE: 'THE ASSESSEE NOW PRODUCING RECONSTRUCTED P&L ACCOU NT, BALANCE SHEET AND CASH BOOK AND BANK BOOK IS FOUND TO BE INCOMPLETE FOR WA NT OF DETAILS OF RESPECTIVE LEDGERS IN THE ASSESSEE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ' IS INCO RRECT BECAUSE: A) IN THE REMAND REPORT THE HON. ITO IN PAGE 2 TH EREOF HE HAS STATED: SEEN FROM THE CASH BOOK AND BANK BOOK MAINTAI NED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT F. Y. THAT IT SHOWS THE CASH DEPOSITS MADE INTO THE SAVINGS ACCOUNTS. ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 5 -: : FURTHER PERUSAL OF THE ORIGINAL BOOKS OF ACCO UNTS, THE ASSESSE 'S VERSION WITH REGARD TO THE DAMAGE OF BOOKS, DUE TO FLOOD APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. B) HENCE, THE HON. CIT(A)-13 STATEMENT, 'THE ASSESSEE NOW PRODUCTION RECONSTRUCTED.....' IS INCORRECT. CASH B OOK, BANK BOOK , P&L ACCOUNT, BALANCE SHEET, ETC., PRODUCED WERE 'RETRIEVED' DAMAGED BOOKS AND NO1 'RECONSTRUCTED.' VII) WITH REFERENCE TO POINT 2(VII) ABOVE: 'HENCE I CONFIRM....................... 'RS. 3,05 ,500/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE' IS INCORRECT BECAUSE: AS EXPLAINED IN EARLIER PARAS THE SOURCE FOR CASH D EPOSITS IN THE BANK IS CLEARLY EXPLAINS AND HENCE THE PEAK CREDIT ADDITION TREATIN G AS UN EXPLAINED IS INCORRECT. PRAYER: THE APPELLANT HERE BY EARNESTLY PRAY TO THE MEMBERS OF THE HON. ITAT THAT: 1) THE HON. MEMBERS OF THE HON. ITAT MAY PLEASE P ERMIT ME TO FILE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL/ SUBMISSIONS WHICH THE APPELLANT MAY DEEM NECESSARY. 2) THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL MENTIONED HERE IN ABOVE MAY BE CONSIDERED FAVORABLY AND IF DEEM FIT ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND DISMISS THE O RDER OF THE HON. CIT(A)-13. SIMILAR ISSUES ARE INVOLVED FOR BOTH THE YEARS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED SIMILAR GROUNDS FOR AY: 2011-12. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AS SESSEE IS SENIOR CITIZEN AND HAS CLAIMED HIMSELF TO BE A FREEDOM FIGHTER AND WAS RUNNING AN INDIAN OIL CORPORATION GAS AGENCY DURING THE YEAR U NDER CONSIDERATION . THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY: 2012-13 BUT HE HAD HOWEVER FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY: 2011-12 WITH REVENUE. WE ARE PRESENTLY SEIZED OF BOTH THE AFORESAID AYS NAMELY AYS : 2011-12 AND 2012-13. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR BOTH THE AFO RESAID ASSESSMENT YEARS WERE RE-OPENED BY AO BY INVOKING PROVISIONS O F SECTION 147/148 OF THE 1961 ACT BY ISSUANCE OF SEPARATE NOTICE(S) U/S 148 , BOTH DATED 30.10.2014 WHICH IN BOTH THE CASE WERE WITHIN FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 6 -: : THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. SIMILAR ISSUES ARE INVOLVED I N BOTH THE YEARS AND WE ARE ADJUDICATING BOTH THESE APPEALS TOGETHER. THE A SSESSEE FOR AY: 2011- 12 FILED A LETTER DATED 12.08.2015 STATING THAT RET URN OF INCOME FILED ON 24.10.2011 MAY BE TREATED AS RETURN OF INCOME IN RE SPECT OF NOTICE ISSUED U/S.148 OF THE ACT BY THE AO. WHILE FOR AY: 2012-13 SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE HIS RETURN OF INCOME ORIGINALLY , THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN PURSUANCE TO NOTICE DAT ED 29.01.2015 ISSUED BY AO U/S 142(1) OF THE 1961 ACT FILED RETURN OF I NCOME ON 17.07.2015 ADMITTING A TOTAL OF RS. 3,46,000/- IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE 1961 ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF REASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS CONDUCTED BY AO U/S 147/148 OF THE 1961 ACT FOR BOTH THE AYS : 2011-12 & 2012-13, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE SOURCES FOR CASH DEPOSITS, CONFIRMATION FOR LOAN, DETAILS OF INTEREST PAID AND COPY OF BAN K STATEMENTS. THE AO IN THE MEANTIME OBTAINED BANK STATEMENTS DIRECTLY FROM BANK WHICH WERE EXAMINED BY THE AO. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE T HE AO DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS THAT DUE TO THE ACCOUNTANT O F THE ASSESSEE LEAVING HIS SERVICE SUDDENLY, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN A POS ITION TO EXPLAIN SOURCES OF CASH DEPOSITS WHICH LED AO TO ADOPT PEAK CREDIT METHOD TO BRING TO TAX THE INCOME WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT LEADING TO AN ADDITION OF RS. 6,25,500/- BEING MADE FOR AY: 2011-12 TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY AO VIDE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10.03.2016 PASSED BY AO U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE 1961 ACT AND SIMILAR A DDITIONS WERE MADE BY AO IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE TUNE OF RS.3 ,05,500/- FOR AY: ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 7 -: : 2012-13 , VIDE SEPARATE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10.0 3.2016 PASSED BY AO U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE 1961 ACT . 4. AGGRIEVED BY AN ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO AS A FORESAID FOR AY: 2011-12 AND 2012-13 VIDE SEPARATE ASSESSMENT ORDERS , THE ASSESSEE FILED SEPARATE APPEAL(S) WITH LD.CIT(A) FOR BOTH THE ASSE SSMENT YEARS. THE ASSESSEE FILED FRESH EVIDENCES BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A ) TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE BUT BOTH THE APPEALS WERE DISMISSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE SEPARATE APPELLATE ORDERS BOTH DATED 11.07.2017 PASSED BY LE ARNED CIT(A). THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED RECTIFICATION PETITI ON U/S.154 OF THE ACT BEFORE LD.CIT(A) ON 18.09.2017 FOR BOTH THE AYS ST ATING THAT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED WITHOUT CONSIDERING ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCES OF CASH BOOK WHICH WAS ALREADY ON RECORD , AS SOURCES OF CASH CREDITS STOOD EXPLAINED. THE LD.CIT(A) DISMISSED SAID RECTIFICATI ON PETITION(S) FOR BOTH THE YEARS AS THEY WERE FILED MANUALLY. THE ASSESS EE FILED ANOTHER RECTIFICATION PETITION(S) U/S.154 BEFORE LEARNED CI T(A) FOR BOTH THE YEARS WHICH WERE FILED ON 16.10.2017 MANUALLY WHICH AGAIN WERE DISMISSED BY LD.CIT(A) AS IN VIEW OF LEARNED CIT(A) RECTIFICATIO N PETITION U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT ARE TO BE E-FILED. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESS EE E-FILED RECTIFICATION PETITION FOR BOTH THE AYS: 2011-12 AND 2012-13 U/S .154 BEFORE LD.CIT(A) ELECTRONICALLY AND RAISED GROUNDS FOR FILING THE AF ORESAID RECTIFICATIONS PETITION. THE ASSESSEE STATED IN THESE RECTIFICATIO N PETITIONS THAT RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DAMAGED BY FLOODS DURING DECEMBER 2015 IN CHENNAI AND HENCE SAME COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO, WHEN REASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY AO FOR BOTH THE YEARS ON 10.03.201 6. IT WAS ALSO ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 8 -: : EXPLAINED BY ASSESSEE THAT THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE AS SESSEE LEFT SERVICE AND HENCE HE COULD NOT MADE PROPER REPRESENTATION BEFOR E THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSEE A LSO STATED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS CONDUC TED BY LD.CIT(A) , THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES EXPLAINI NG CASH DEPOSITS BY WAY OF COMPUTERIZED CASH BOOK AND BANK BOOK. THE A SSESSEE ALSO FILED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR VERIFICATION ALONG WITH BALAN CE SHEET , P&L A/C, INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK BOOK MAINTAINED FOR FYS, CASH BOOK(S) MAINTAINED AND ITR ACKNOWLEDGMENT(S) FOR BOTH THE YEARS. THE MATTER WAS REMANDED BY LD.CIT(A) TO AO FOR NECESSARY VERIFICAT ION AND FOR SUBMISSION OF REMAND REPORT. THE AO ADMITTED IN IT S REMAND REPORT THAT ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED TO PRODUCE THE RELEVANT RECO RDS BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS DUE TO FLOODS IN CHENNAI. THE AO ALSO ADMITTED IN REMAND REPORT THAT AFORESAI D DOCUMENTS WERE FILED, THE COPY OF REMAND REPORT IS PRODUCED FOR AY : 2011-12 IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD-11(4), ROOM NO.206, 2ND FLOOR, TOWER II, BSNL BUILDING, 16.GREAMS ROAD, CHENNAI-60 0 006. NOTICE U/S 271 (1) (C) R.W.S 129 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PAN: AATPG7393J/ NCW-11(4)/ REMAND REPORT/2018-19 DATED: 30/07/2018 TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-13, 121, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, CHENNAI-600 034. RESPECTED SIR, ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 9 -: : SUB: REMAND REPORT IN THE CASE OF SHRI. K. GURUMUTH Y-PAN: AAIPG7393J AY: 2011-12 - REG. REF: REMAND REPORT UNDER RULE 46A OF INCOME TAX RUL ES 1962 LETTER DATED 13.06.2018 FROM THE O/O CIT(A)-13 IN ITA NO. 146/AY 2011-12/RR/CIT(A)-13. ***** KIND REFERENCE IS SOLICITED TO THE ABOVE. AT THE OUTSET, I HEREBY TENDER MY SINCERE APOLOGY, FOR NOT SUBMITTING REMAND REPORT, AS PER THE DIRECTION OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) , AT FIRST INSTANCE. THE REVISED REMAND REPORT IS SUBMITTED AS UNDER: DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND REPORT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE UNDER SIGNED. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT DUE TO HEAVY RAIN DURING THE MONT H OF NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 2015 THE RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DAMAGED & DUE TO THIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED, RETRIEVED ORIGINAL BOOKS OF ACCO UNTS FOR VERIFICATION. PERUSAL OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE ASSESSEE'S VERSION REGAR DING DAMAGE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED BELOW MENTIONED BOOKS OF ACCO UNTS FOR VERIFICATION: 1. BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2011 2. PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE F.Y. 2010-11 3. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK BOOK MAINTAINED IN THE BOO KS OF ASSESSEE FOR THE F.Y. 2010-11. 4. CASH BOOK MAINTAINED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESS EE FOR THE F.Y. 2010-11 5. INCOME TAX ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2011-12, ASSESSING OFFICERS REMARK THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE EXAMINED , IT WAS SEEN FROM THE CASH BOOK & BANK BOOK MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT F.Y. THAT IT SHOWS THE CASH DEPOSITS, MADE INTO THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOU NT. FURTHER PERUSAL OF ORIGINAL BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS THE ASSESSEE'S VERSION WITH REGAR D TO DAMAGE OF BOOKS, DUE TO FLOOD APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. IT IS HUMBLY REQUESTED, THAT THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. YOURS FAITHFULLY SD/- (MANOJ RAJ MINZ) INCOME TAX OFFICER NON-CORPORATE WARD-11 (4) CHENNAI-600 006 ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 10 -: : THE ASSESSEE WAS CONFRONTED WITH REMAND REPORT BY L D.CIT(A) AND ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ALL DETAILS / EXPLANATIONS INCLUDING SOURCES OF CASH DEPOSITS BEF ORE AO IN REMAND REPORT PROCEEDINGS AND NOTHING MORE IS REQUIRED TO BE SAID AND PRAYERS WERE MADE TO DELETE ADDITIONS AS WERE MADE BY THE A O. THE LD.CIT(A) REJECTED CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE , BY HOLDING A S UNDER: DECISION: THE APPELLANT FILED RECTIFICATION PETITION U/S 154 S TATING THAT THE UNDERSIGNED HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES SUBMITTED IN TH E COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. THE APPELLANT CONTENDED THAT THE VERY BASIS ON WHICH PE AK CASH CREDIT METHOD IS TO BE APPLIED IS, WHEN THE APPELLANT IS COMPLETELY UNABLE TO EXPL AIN THE SOURCE OF CASH CREDIT. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS PR OVIDED SOURCE OF CASH CREDIT (CASH BOOK HAVING POSITIVE CASH BALANCE) EVEN THOUGH NOT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BUT AT THE TIME OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. THE APPELLANT FURTH ER SUBMITTED THAT THE NON CO-OPERATION AND NON SUBMISSION OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AT THE TIM E OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE DUE TO SOME UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES AND CLARIFIED IT WAS NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR WILLFUL, BECAUSE OF WHICH HE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHICH LEAD TO THE ADDITION OF PEAK CREDIT OF RS. 6,25,500/- FOR THE YEAR UNDER CO NSIDERATION. THE APPELLANT REQUESTED NOT TO INVOKE ANY FUTURE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS SINCE NON SUBMISSION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WAS DUE TO NATURAL EVENT WHICH IS ACT OF GOD AND BEYOND THE CONTROL OF BONAFIDE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT'S ABOVE SUBMISSIONS HAS BEEN CAREFULL Y CONSIDERED. THE ADDITIONAL SUBMISSION OF CASH BOOK AS NEW EVIDENCE SUBMITTED D URING THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, WHICH ORIGINALLY COULD NOT BE SUBMITTE D BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS REMANDED TO THE AO AND WAS ASKED TO SUBMIT A REMAND REPORT AFTER CONSIDERING THE NEW EVIDENCE BY GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT. THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED THE REMAND REPORT THE SAME IS REPRODUCED HERE UNDER: 'DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND REPORT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT DUE TO HEAVY RAIN DURING THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER 2015 THE RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DAMAGED & DUE TO THIS BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. FURTHER THE ASSES SEE PRODUCED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE ASSESSEE'S VERSION REGARDING DAMAGE OF BOOKS OF ACC OUNTS APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED BELOW MENTIONED BOOKS OF ACCO UNTS FOR VERIFICATION: 1. BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2011 2. PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE F.Y. 2010-11 3. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK BOOK MAINTAINED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE F.Y. 2010-11 4. CASH BOOK MAINTAINED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSE E FOR THE F.Y. 2010-11. 5. INCOME TAX ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2011-12. ASSESSING OFFICER REMARK THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE EXAMINED . IT WAS SEEN FROM THE BOOK & BANK BOOK MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT F. Y. THAT IT THE CASH DEPOSITS, MADE INTO THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT. FURTHER PERUSAL OF ORIGIN AL BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS THE ASSESSEE'S VERSION WITH REGARD TO DAMAGE OF BOOKS, DUE TO FLOO D APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. LT IS HUMBLE REQUESTED, THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS OF THE CASE.' ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 11 -: : THE COPY OF THIS REMAND REPORT WAS ALSO MADE AVAILA BLE TO THE APPELLANT FOR HIS REBUTTAL. THE AR REPLIED TO THE REMAND REPORT BY REBUTTAL DAT ED 14.08.2018 STATING S UNDER: REBUTTAL TO REMAND REPORT SUB: REBUTTAL TO REMAND REPORT IN THE CA SE OF SHRI. K. GURUMURTHY - PAN: AAIPG7393J - AY: 2011-12 REF: REMAND REPORT UNDER RULE 46A OF INCOME TAX RULES 1962 LETTER DT.13.06.2018 FROM THE O/O CIT(A)-13 IN ITA NO: 146/ AY 2011-12/RR/CIT(A)-13. WE HAVE RECEIVED AND HAVE NOTED THE CONTENTS OF THE REMAND REPORT DT. 30.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE HON.ITO NCW-11(4) CHENNAI, WITH RESPECT TO THE AY 2011-12. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY POINT TO REBUT THE CONTENTS OF T HE REMAND REPORT, SINCE THE HON. ITO HAS ACCEPTED ALL OF OUR SUBMISSIONS. WE HAVE ENCLOSED HEREWITH THE FOLLOWING: 1. COPY* OF LETTER DT. 17.05.2018 SUBMITTED TO HO N. ITO NCW 11(4). *(PDF COPY AND EDITABLE WORD FILE) 2. COPY ITR ACK AY 2011-12 3. COPY OF BALANCE SHEET FOR THE FY 2010-11 4. COPY OF PROFIT & LOSS A/C FOR THE FY 2010-11 5. COPY OF IOB BANK BOOK AND CASH BOOK FOR THE FY 2010-11 PRAYER: WE EARNESTLY PRAY TO THE HON. CIT (A) 13 TO KINDLY CONSIDER AND ACCEPT OUR SUBMISSIONS. THE AO WAS REQUIRED TO VERIFY THE SOURCE OF CASH DEP OSIT APPEARING IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS RE-CONSTITUTED CASH BOOKS BASED ON WITHDRAWAL AND DEPOSITS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNTS. BUT HAS NOT EXPLAINED THE SOURCE FRO M WHERE THE CASH HAS BEEN GENERATED WHICH WAS THEN DEPOSITED INTO A BANK ACCOUNT. THUS, EVEN DURING THE REMAND REPORT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK FOR RS.49,69,427/- AS EVIDENT FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK BOOK CONSTRUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS UNDER: APR-10 261588 MAY-10 44720 JUN-10 314220 JUL-10 501720 AUG-10 203904 SEP-10 1050078 OCT-10 107450 NOV-10 72079 DEC-10 202785 JAN-11 43100 FEB-11 1150283 MAR-11 1049000 49,69,427 THE AO HAS NOT EXAMINED THE SOURCE OF ABOVE CASH DEP OSITS, MORESOEVER, COMPLETE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, EVIDENCES, VARIOUS LEDGER ACCOUNTS LIK E LOAN ACCOUNTS, JEWEL LOAN ACCOUNT, COMMISSION ACCOUNT, INTEREST ACCOUNTS COULD NOT BE FURNISHED BEFORE THE APPEAL AUTHORITY, AS THE FACTS REMAINS THAT THE SAME ARE N OT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT AS SUCH COULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIATED WITH EVIDENCES, MOREOVER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE CASH DE POSIT AS UNEXPLAINED AND NOT GIVING CREDIT FOR WITHDRAWAL FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT S IS TANTAMOUNT TO INJUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN ALL FAIRNESS IN ABSENCE OF SUPPORTING AND CORROBORATIVE ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 12 -: : EVIDENCES CONSIDERING PEAK CASH CREDIT AS UNEXPLAINED CASH IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE AND JUST AN D PROPER. THUS THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS. 6,25, 500/- SHALL BE DELETED IN VIEW OF THE ASSESSEE NOW PRODUCING RECONSTRUCTED P&L ACCOUNT, B ALANCE SHEET AND CASH BOOK AND BANK BOOK IS FOUND TO BE INCOMPLETE FOR WANT OF DETAILS OF RESPECTIVE LEDGERS IN THE ASSESSEE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. HENCE I CONFIRM THE ACTION OF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER TO TREAT PEAK CASH CREDIT AS ARRIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING T HE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR RS. 6,25,500/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON THE ISSUE IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMI SSED. 5. AGGRIEVED BY SEPARATE APPELLATE ORDERS BOTH DATE D 21.08.2018 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) FOR BOTH AYS , THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED TWO SEPERATE APPEALS BEFORE TRIBUNAL. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE IN VOLVED BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE MADE CONTENTIONS BEFORE THE BENCH THAT ASS ESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS ONUS AND ALL THE DETAILS AS TO SOURCES OF CASH DEPOSITS WERE DULY EXPLAINED IN REMAND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE AO AND BEFOR E LD.CIT(A). IT WAS STATED THAT THERE WAS FLOOD/RAINS IN CHENNAI IN DEC EMBER 2015 WHICH LED TO DAMAGE TO THE RECORDS/BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND HENC E WHEN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE GOING ON BEFORE AO, THE ASSESSEE C OULD NOT PRODUCE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS/RECORDS AND IT IS EXPLAINED THAT LATER ON SAID DOCUMENTS INCLUDING CASH BOOK AND SOURCES OF CASH D EPOSITS WERE DULY PRODUCED BEFORE AO & LD.CIT(A) AND PROPER EXPLANAT IONS WERE SUBMITTED. IT IS PRAYED THAT ADDITIONS TO THE INCOME AS WERE MADE BY AUTHORITIES BELOW BY ADOPTING PEAK CASH METHOD BE DELETED. IT WAS FURTHER STATED BEFORE THE BENCH BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E THAT ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE LEFT WHEN REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WER E GOING ON WHICH ALSO LED TO NON-PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE AO. THE LD.DR RELIED UPON ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 13 -: : 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE HAVE OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE IS SENIOR CI TIZEN AND HAS CLAIMED HIMSELF TO BE A FREEDOM FIGHTER AND RUNNING AN IOC AGENCY DURING THE YEAR. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ORIG INALLY WITH AO FOR AY 2011-12, BUT NO RETURN OF INCOME WAS ORIGINALLY FIL ED FOR AY: 2012-13. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED BY REVENUE BY INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147/148 OF THE 1961 ACT FOR BOTH THE AY S: 2011-12 AND 2012- 13. THE SAID REOPENING OF CONCLUDED ASSESSMENT WAS DONE BY AO FOR BOTH THE AYS WITHIN FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF ASSESSME NT YEAR . WE HAVE OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE BOOKS OF A CCOUNTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS/RECORDS DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OWI NG TO FLOODS/RAINS IN CHENNAI IN DECEMBER 2015 AS IT WAS CLAIMED THAT RECORDS/DOCUMENTS WERE DAMAGED IN RAINS/FLOODS. THE ASSESSMENT WAS CO MPLETED IN MARCH 2016 BY AO FOR AFORESAID AYS. THE SAID FACTUM OF D AMAGE TO RECORDS IN FLOODS/RAINS IN CHENNAI WAS LATER PROVED TO BE CORR ECT AS ACCEPTED BY AO IN REMAND REPORT. THE ASSESSEE DURING APPELLATE PRO CEEDINGS CONDUCTED BY LEARNED CIT(A) FILED RECONSTRUCTED RECORDS INCLU DING CASH BOOKS , BANK BOOK ETC BUT LEARNED CIT(A) DISMISSED APPEAL(S) FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR BOTH THE AYS. LATER THE ASSESSEE FILED THREE RECTI FICATIONS PETITIONS U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A), THE FIRST TW O WERE DISMISSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AS THE SAME WERE FILED MANUALLY WHIL E THE THIRD RECTIFICATION PETITION U/S 154 WAS E-FILED WHICH WA S LATER ADJUDICATED BY LEARNED CIT(A) ON MERITS. THE LEARNED CIT(A) CALLED FOR REMAND REPORT FROM AO WHEREIN AO ACCEPTED CONTENTION OF THE ASSES SEE THAT IT IS DUE TO ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 14 -: : FLOOD/RAINS IN CHENNAI THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODU CE ITS RECORD. THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WERE ADMITTEDLY PRODUCED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WHICH IS ACKNOWELDEGED BY AUTHORITIES BELOW: 1. COPY* OF LETTER DT. 17.05.2018 SUBMITTED TO HO N. ITO NCW 11(4). *(PDF COPY AND EDITABLE WORD FILE) 2. COPY ITR ACK AY 2011-12 3. COPY OF BALANCE SHEET FOR THE FY 2010-11 4. COPY OF PROFIT & LOSS A/C FOR THE FY 2010-11 5. COPY OF IOB BANK BOOK AND CASH BOOK FOR THE FY 2010-11 SIMILAR RECORDS WERE ALSO PRODUCED FOR AY: 2011-12 BY ASSESSEE BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) AND AO DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS.THE LD.CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT SOURCE FOR CASH DEPOSITS WERE NOT EXP LAINED WITH THE COGENT EVIDENCES. THE ASSESSEE HAS TRIED TO EXPLAIN THE SO URCES OF CASH DEPOSITS BEFORE US THROUGH CASH/BANK BOOK FILED BEFORE US BY WAY OF WITHDRAWALS FROM BANKS, RENT , PARTNER REMUNERATION FROM FIRM E TC. WHICH NEED VERIFICTAION. WE HAVE ALSO AT THE SAME TIME OBSERVE D THAT NO SPECIFIC DEFICIENCIES WERE POINTED OUT BY AUTHORITIES BELOW IN THE CASH/BANK BOOKS WHILE GENERALIZED ADVERSE COMMENTS WERE MADE BY AU THORITIES BELOW. TO BE FAIR AND REASONABLE TO BOTH THE PARTIES AND TO R ENDER JUSTICE, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THERE IS A NEED FOR VERIFICATION O F CASH/BANK BOOK ENTRIES VIS--VIS CASH DEPOSITS AND CO-RELATION WITH INCOME DECLARED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE REVENUE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED AND CO NSEQUENTLY DUE TAXES PAID TO REVENUE ON SUCH INCOME CLAIMED TO BE SOURCE S OF DEPOSITS. THUS FOR THIS LIMITED VERIFICATION ,WE ARE RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR BOTH THE YEARS AS SIMILAR ISSUES ARE INV OLVED. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO GO THROUGH RECORDS PRODUCED BY ASSESSES AND TO POINT OUT SPECIFIC DEFECTS /ESCARPMENT OF INCOME LEADING TO CULMINATION OF INCOME ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 :- 15 -: : WHICH HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND WHICH NEEDED TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE INSTEAD OF MAKING GENERAL IZED COMMENTS. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY ASSESSEE IN ITA NOS.2921 & 2922/CHNY/2018 FOR AY: 2012-13 & 2011-12 ARE ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 27 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( N.R.S. GANESAN ) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ! ) ( RAMIT KOCHAR ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, 1 /DATED: 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2020. TLN - +!2 32 /COPY TO: 1. * /APPELLANT 4. 4 /CIT 2. +,* /RESPONDENT 5. 2 + /DR 3. 4 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. ' /GF