A.C.I.T., Circle-1, Gwalior V. Sh. Umesh Agarwal, Gwalior

ITA 326/AGR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0407 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-03-2013
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 12-08-2011

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 ASSTT. YEAR : 2002-03 TO 2008-09 A.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1, VS. SHRI UMESH AGARWAL, GWALIOR. PROP. M/S. KAILASH CHANDRA & SONS, SARAFA BAZAR, LASHKAR, GWALIOR (PAN: AESPJ 2870 B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI WASEEM ARSHAD, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJENDRA SHARMA/MANUJ SHARMA, ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 01.03.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 08.03.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS ORDER SHALL DISPOSE OF ALL THE DEPARTMENTAL A PPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), GWALIOR DATED 10.05.2011 AND 18.05.2011 FOR VARIOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS MENTIONED ABOVE. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND CONSIDERED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. DR MAINLY RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCED THE REQUIRED DETAILS BEFO RE THE AO, THEREFORE, THE BOOKS ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 2 OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNVERIFIABLE AN D, THEREFORE, THE SAME HAVE BEEN RIGHTLY REJECTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING ADD ITION BY ENHANCING THE SALES AND THE GROSS PROFIT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND F ILED CHART OF ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEAS UNDER APPEAL ALONGWITH COMPUTATION OF INCOME A ND PROOF OF FILING OF INCOME TAX RETURNS AND SUBMITTED THAT FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 AND 2003-04, THE RETURNS WERE FILED ON 23.09.2003, I.E,, MUCH PRIOR TO THE SEARCH CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ON 07.08.2007. THEREFORE, THE RETU RNS ARE DEEMED TO BE PROCESSED U/S. 143(1) AND NO MATERIAL WAS FOUND IN THOSE ASSE SSMENT YEARS AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE AND RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF ANIL KR. BHATIA & OTHERS VS. ACIT, 1 ITR (TRIBUNAL) 484. HE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH NO MATERI AL WAS FOUND IN OTHER YEARS, BUT EVEN IF PROFIT HAS TO BE ESTIMATED, IT IS TO BE EST IMATED ON REASONABLE BASIS CONSIDERING THE HISTORY OF ASSESSEE AND PROFIT MARG IN AND WHATEVER ADDITIONAL INCOME WAS DECLARED IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WAS SUFFICIENT FOR MAKING THE ADDITION. THEREFORE, NO SEPARATE ADDITION SHOULD BE MADE AND THE LD. CIT(A) RIGHTLY DELETED ALL THE ADDITIONS. IN THE ALTERNATE CONTENT ION, HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AT THE MOST A REASONABLE AND MINIMUM PROFIT MAY BE ESTIMAT ED IN THE REMAINING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 . ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 3 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FIN D THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS IN ITA NO. 324/AGRA/2011 TO ITA NO. 329/AGR A/2011 RELATED TO THE SEARCH AND PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153A, IN WHICH IDENTICAL GROUN DS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN ALL THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS AND ITA NO. 330/AGRA/2011 RELA TES TO THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, WE PROPOSE TO DECIDE THE FIRST SIX APPEALS TOGETHER IN ITA NO. 324 TO 329/AGRA/2011 AS UNDER : ITA NOS. 324 TO 329/AGRA/2011 : 4. THESE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINS T COMMON ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), GWALIOR DATED 10.05.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 TO 2007-08. 5. IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THE REVENUE RAISED GROUND NO. 1, CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN CANCELLING THE ASSESSMENT MADE U/S. 153A HOLDING THAT NOTICE U/S. 143(2) WAS NOT ISSUED WHEN IT IS A MERE PROCED URAL LAPSE WHICH CAN BE CURED. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ASS ESSMENTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED U/S. 153A WITHOUT ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 143(2) BY TH E AO. THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE TO BE CORRECT. HOWEVER, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE NOTICES U/S. 142(1) HAVE BEEN ISSUED. THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWING T HE ORDER OF ITAT, AGRA BENCH IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THAT THE ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 143(2) IS MANDATORY AND FOLLOWING ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 4 THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F HOTEL BLUE MOON, 321 ITR 362, CANCELLED THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS. 6. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT IN THIS CASE, NOTICE U /S. 153A AND OTHER STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH QUEST IONNAIRE CALLING FOR THE DETAILS REQUIRED FOR COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT. THEREFOR E, THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ASHOK CHADDHA VS. ITO, 337 ITR 399, IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THAT IN ASSESSMENT IN SEARCH CASES, WHEN NOTICE U/S. 153A AND QUESTIONNAIRES CALLING FOR THE DETAILS WER E SENT, FURTHER ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 143(2) IS NOT NECESSARY. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS, THEREFORE, COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, IN W HICH THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HOTEL BLUE MOON (SUPRA ) HAS ALSO BEEN CONSIDERED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DISPUTE TH E CONTENTION OF THE LD. DR THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE BY TH E ABOVE JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF ASHOK CHADDHA VS. ITO (SUPRA). 7. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTI ES IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SHRI ASHOK CHADDHA (SUPRA), IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THAT NO SPECIFIC NOTICE WAS REQUIRED U/S. 143(2) OF THE IT ACT WHEN NOTICE AS REQUIRED U/S. 153A OF THE IT CT WAS ALREADY GIVE N, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 5 COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AND THERE IS SUFFI CIENT COMPLIANCE BY THE AO FOR COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE W AS ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 153A AND ALSO ISSUED FURTHER STATUTORY NOTICES REQUIRING THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE DETAILS. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT() SHOULD NOT HAVE QUASHED TH E ASSESSMENT ORDERS IN THE MATTER. THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON GROUND NO. 1 IN ALL THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE ACCORDING SET ASIDE AND THE ORDER OF TH E AO IS RESTORED. THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ON GROUND NO. 1 IN ALL THE APP EALS ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 8. ON GROUND NO. 2 IN ALL THE APPEALS OF THE DEPART MENT, THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITIONS MADE ON ACCOUN T OF GROSS PROFIT IN A SUM OF RS.6,59,386/-, RS.6,83,463/-, RS.4,48,780/-, RS.5,0 4,058/-, RS.9,22,750/- AND RS.11,62,488/- IN ALL THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 8.1 THE ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED ON TOTAL IN COME AS AGAINST INCOME RETURNED AS UNDER : SL.NO. ASSTT. YEAR INCOME RETURNED INCOME ASSESSED ADDITION MADE . 1. 2002-03 RS.78,284/- RS.7,37,670/- RS.6,59,386/ - 2. 2003-04 RS.83,562/- RS.7,67,025/- RS.6,83,463/ - 3. 2004-05 RS.47,450/- RS.4,96,230/- RS.4,48,780/ - 4. 2005-06 RS.84,877/- RS.5,88,935/- RS.5,04,058/ - 5. 2006-07 RS.96,140/- RS.10,18,890/- RS.9,22,750 /- 6. 2007-08 RS.1,59,177/- RS.13,21,665/- RS.11,62,4 88/- ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 6 9. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT REQUISITION U/S. 132A WAS MADE TO THE POLICE AUTHORITIES, GWALIOR ON 07.08.07 TO DELIVER/ HANDOVER GOODS, I.E., SILVER JEWELLERY AND ARTICLES WHICH WAS SEIZED BY THE POLI CE ON 27.07.2007 FROM SHRI RAKESH GAIKWAD, SHRI AJAY JAIN AND SHRI NIRMAL KUMA R JAIN, EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE FROM VEHICLE NO. MP 07-CA 1981 BELONGING T O SHRI SHRINIWAS AGARWAL. THE SEIZED ITEMS WERE TAKEN IN POSSESSION BY THE IN COME TAX OFFICER (INVESTIGATION), GWALIOR AND ACCORDINGLY PANCHNAMA WAS PREPARED ON 07.08.2007. THE APPELLANT HAS MADE SURRENDER AND OFFERED THE FU LL VALUE OF THE JEWELLERY AS HIS UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 AT RS.2,05, 771/-. ASSESSMENTS OF PRECEDING SIX YEARS, WHICH ARE UNDER APPEAL, HAVE A CCORDINGLY BEEN COMPLETED U/S. 153A. THE ADDITIONS WERE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT GROSS PROFIT RATE AND ESTIMATED STOCK TURNOVER IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS. HOWEVER, THE AO HAS RELIED UPON THE FACT THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF COMPLETE QUANTITY-WISE, QUALITY-WISE AND ITEM-WISE DETAILS OF STOCK, PURCHA SES AND SALES, BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT LIABLE TO BE REJECTED. THE ASSESSEE FILED YEAR-WISE DETAILS OF SALES, STOCK, GROSS PROFIT ETC. BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) AND CONTENDED THAT THE ADDITION IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS BECAUSE NO MATERIAL IS FOUND A GAINST THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE LD. CIT(A), ACCORDINGLY, DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN ALL THE YEARS. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE FINDING OF ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 7 THE LD. CIT(A) TOGETHER IN PARA 4.1 TO 5 OF THE APP ELLATE ORDER ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER : DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELL ANT HAS SUBMITTED YEAR-WISE DETAILS OF SALES, STOCK, G.P. E TC. WHICH ARE AS UNDER:- PARTICULARS A.Y. A.Y. A.Y. A.Y. A.Y. A.Y. 2007-08 2006-07 2005-06 2004-05 2003-04 2002-03 --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- ------------ SILVER (JEWELLERY BICHIA BULLION ETC.) TOTAL SALES (RS.) 742662/- 470398/- 6 66361/- 9198141/- 1059337/- 544056/- SALES-QTY. (KG.) 98.747/- 58.19 102.006 138.09 257.558 1 27.993 G.P. (RS.) 147602/- 96795/- 7 8661/- 57810/- 84747/- 44884/ - CLOSING STOCK (RS.)500630/- 385944/- 223081/- 187966/- 290540/- 279420/- CLOSING STOCK- QTY (KG.) 72.518 59.940.5 41.571 31. 837 74.497 71.646 G.P.% 19.87 20.58 11.80 .6.28 8.00 8.25 STOCK TURNOVER RATIO (IN RUPEE TERMS) 1:1.48 1:1.22 1:2.99 1:4.89 1:3.646 1:1.95 STOCK TURNOVER RATIO (IN QUANTITATIVE TERMS)1:1.36 1:0.970 1:2.45 1:4.3 6 1:3.46 1:1.79 --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- --------------- AS AGAINST ABOVE A.O. HAS UNIFORMLY TAKEN THE STOCK TURNOVER RATIO OF 1:12 AND G.P. OF 22% WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION AND BASIS. THE TRADING RESULTS DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT AS PER RETURNS F ILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 153A ARE THE SAME AS SHOWN IN ORIGINAL R ETURNS FILED IN DUE COURSE FOR EACH OF THE ASSTT. YEAR. IN FACT, THE SA ME A.O. ON SIMILAR FACTS, HAS TAKEN THE SAME ESTIMATE OF STOCK TURNOVE R RATIO AND OF G.P. AT 1:12 AND 22% RESPECTIVELY IN EACH CASE OF JEWELL ERY ASSESSED BY HIM. THE SAME IS EVIDENT FROM ASSESSMENT ORDERS PAS SED U/S 153A IN CASE OF SH. SHRINIWAS AGARWAL, SHRI SUNIL JAIN, SH. MUKESH JAIN ETC. IN CASE OF SHRI SUNIL JAIN, ADDITION OF RS.1,99,83, 893/- MADE ON ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 8 SIMILAR FACTS, MADE IN SEARCH ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 153 A HAS BEEN DELETED BY ME VIDE APPEAL ORDER DTD. 30.03.201 0 IN APPEAL NO.205/IT/09-10/GWL. VIDE ORDER DTD. 10.03.2011. HO NBLE ITAT, AGRA IN ITA NO.269/AGR/2010 HAS CONFIRMED THE SAID APPEAL ORDER BY MENTIONING AS UNDER :- AFTER GOING THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVE NUE ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE SEARCH WH ICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE OF THE CO NSIDERED OPINION THAT NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE WELL REAS ONED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. WE UPHOLD THE SA ME BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 4.2 FURTHER THE ASST. YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL PERTAINING TO THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN FOUND OR SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF REQUISITION AND POST OPERATIONS ENQUI RY JUSTIFYING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. THOUGH THE VARIOUS COURTS HAVE HELD IN THE CONTEXT OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT OF SEARCH CASES THAT ADDITION MADE IN TH ESE ASSESSMENTS HAVE NECESSARILY TO BE RESTRICTED TO ITEMS OF UNDIS CLOSED INCOME, HOWEVER, THE SAME PRINCIPLE APPLIES IN THE CONTEXT OF CURRENT PROVISIONS RELATING TO SEARCH & SEIZURE ASSESSMENTS AS ENUMERATED FROM SEC. 153A ONWARDS. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY HONBLE ITAT. DELHI IN CASE OF ANIL KUMAR BHATIA VS. ACIT (2010) I ITR (TR IB) 484 (DEL) THAT AS PER PROVISIONS OF SEC. 153A, THE POWER TO F RAME ASSESSMENT SHALL BE TO THE EXTENT OF INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMEN T COMING TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE A.O. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. ASSESSMENTS U/S 153A SHALL BE WITH REFERENCE TO THE VALUABLE ARTICL ES OR THINGS FOUND OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED DURING THE YEAR, DURING THE SEA RCH WHICH ARE NOT DISCLOSED IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. THUS IN RESPE CT OF COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS, WHETHER 143(1)(A) 143(3), NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IF NO INCRIMINATING AND UNDISCLOSED MATERIAL IS FOUND DUR ING SEARCH. 4.3 SINCE THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE ON SAME FACTS AND ESTIMATION, THE SAME HEREBY DELETED FOR THE REA SONS MENTIONED IN DETAIL IN CASE OF SHRI SUNIL JAIN. THUS, THE ADDITI ONS MADE BY THE A.O. ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 9 FOR EACH OF THE ASSTT. YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE NOT FOUND SUSTAINABLE EITHER IN LAW OR ON MERITS. IN THE RESULTS, APPEALS FOR ALL THE SIX YEARS ARE ALLOWED. 10. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND G ONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED CHAR T OF ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND EXPLAINED THAT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 AND 2003 -04, THE RETURNS OF INCOME HAVE BEEN FILED ON 23.09.2003. THEREFORE, THESE ARE DEEMED TO BE PROCESSED U/S. 143(1) PRIOR TO SEARCH BECAUSE THE STATUTORY PERIOD HAD ALREADY LAPSED. ADMITTEDLY, NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND AGAINST TH E ASSESSEE AND FINDING OF FACT RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) HAVE NOT BEEN DISPUTED. THEREFORE, SUCH ADDITIONS COULD NOT BE MADE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY ESTIMATING THE SALES AND ENHANCING THE GROSS PROFIT. THE SAME VIEW IS ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE DECI SION OF ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF ANIL KUMAR BHATIA (SUPRA), IN WHICH IT WAS HELD WHERE PROCESSING RETURNS UNDER SECTION 143(1)(A) STOOD COMPLETED, FO R RETURNS FILED IN DUE COURSE BEFORE SEARCH, AND NO MATERIAL IS FOUND IN SEARCH T HEREAFTER, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE. THEREFORE, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE FOR ASSESSMEN T YEARS 2002-03 AND 2003-04 WOULD NOT HAVE ANY MERIT AND THE SAME ARE L IABLE TO BE DISMISSED. HOWEVER, IN THE REMAINING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2007- 08, IT IS ADMITTED FACT THAT THE RETURNS OF INCOME HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 01.10.2007, I.E., AFTER SEARCH/REQUISITION WAS CARR IED OUT ON 07.08.2007. THEREFORE, ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 10 THERE IS NO QUESTION OF COMPLETION/PROCESSING OF AN Y RETURN EITHER U/S. 143(1) OR SECTION 143(3) OF THE IT ACT. SECTION 153A OF THE A CT PROVIDES AS UNDER : 153A. (1)] NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SECTION 139 , SECTION 147 , SECTION 148 , SECTION 149 , SECTION 151 AND SECTION 153 , IN THE CASE OF A PERSON WHERE A SEARCH IS INITIATED UN DER SECTION 132 OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, OTHER DOCUMENTS OR ANY ASSETS ARE REQUISITIONED UNDER SECTION 132A AFTER THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2003, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL (A) ISSUE NOTICE TO SUCH PERSON REQUIRING HIM TO F URNISH WITHIN SUCH PERIOD, AS MAY BE SPECIFIED IN THE NOTICE, THE RETU RN OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING WITHIN SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (B), IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM A ND VERIFIED IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER AND SETTING FORTH SUCH OTHER PART ICULARS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED AND THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL, SO FAR AS MAY BE, APPLY ACCORDINGLY AS IF SUCH RETURN WERE A RETURN REQUIRE D TO BE FURNISHED UNDER SECTION 139 ; (B) ASSESS OR REASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME OF SIX ASS ESSMENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SUCH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITI ON IS MADE : PROVIDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ASSESS OR REASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME IN RESPECT OF EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING W ITHIN SUCH SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS: PROVIDED FURTHER THAT ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT, IF ANY, RELATING T O ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING WITHIN THE PERIOD OF SI X ASSESSMENT YEARS REFERRED TO IN THIS SUB-SECTION PENDING ON THE DATE OF INITIATION OF THE SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OR MAKING OF REQUISITION UNDER SECTION 132A , AS THE CASE MAY BE, SHALL ABATE : PROVIDED ALSO THAT THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY BY RULES MADE BY I T AND PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE (EXCEPT IN CA SES WHERE ANY ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT HAS ABATED UNDER THE SEC OND PROVISO), SPECIFY THE CLASS OR CLASSES OF CASES IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO ISSUE NOTICE FOR ASSESSING OR REASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME FOR SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY P RECEDING THE ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 11 ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WH ICH SEARCH IS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITION IS MADE. ] (2) IF ANY PROCEEDING INITIATED OR ANY ORDER OF ASS ESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT MADE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) HAS BEEN AN NULLED IN APPEAL OR ANY OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDING, THEN, NOTWITHSTANDIN G ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SUB-SECTION (1) OR SECTION 153 , THE ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT RELATING TO ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR WHICH HAS ABATED UNDER THE SECOND PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (1), SHALL STAND REVIVED WITH EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF SUCH ANNUL MENT BY THE COMMISSIONER: PROVIDED THAT SUCH REVIVAL SHALL CEASE TO HAVE EFFECT, IF S UCH ORDER OF ANNULMENT IS SET ASIDE.] EXPLANATION.FOR THE REMOVAL OF DOUBTS, IT IS HEREB Y DECLARED THAT, (I) SAVE AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION, SECTION 153B AND SECTION 153C , ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL APPLY TO T HE ASSESSMENT MADE UNDER THIS SECTION; (II) IN AN ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT MADE IN RESP ECT OF AN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER THIS SECTION, THE TAX SHALL B E CHARGEABLE AT THE RATE OR RATES AS APPLICABLE TO SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR . 10.1. ITAT, MUMBAI SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF AL L CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. VS. DY. CIT 137 ITD 287 (SB) CONSIDE RED THE FOLLOWING TWO QUESTIONS : 1. WHETHER, ON THE FACTS AND IN LAW, THE SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 153A ENCOMPASSES ADDITIONS, NOT BASED ON ANY I NCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ? 2. WHETHER, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80-IA(4) OF THE ACT, ON MERITS ? THE SPECIAL BENCH IN PARA 53, HELD AS UNDER : ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 12 THE QUESTION NOW IS WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF ASSESSME NT OR REASSESSMENT OF TOTAL INCOME U/S. 153A(1)(B) AND TH E FIRST PROVISO ? WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT FOR ANSWERING THIS QUESTION , GUIDANCE WILL HAVE TO BE SOUGHT FROM SECTION 132(1). IF ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR OTHER DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT HAD NOT BEEN PRODUCED IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN OUR HUMBLE OPINION SUCH BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR OTHER D OCUMENTS HAVE TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHILE MAKING ASSESSMENT OR RE ASSESSMENT OF TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE AFORESAID PROVISION. SIMILAR POSITION WILL OBTAIN IN A CASE WHERE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OR UNDISC LOSED PROPERTY HAS BEEN FOUND AS A CONSEQUENCE OF SEARCH. IN OTHER WORDS, HARMONIOUS INTERPRETATION WILL PRODUCE THE FOLLOWIN G RESULTS :- (A) INSOFAR AS PENDING ASSESSMENTS ARE CONCERNED, THE J URISDICTION TO MAKE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENT U/S. 153 A MERGE INTO ONE AND ONLY ONE ASSESSMENT FOR EACH ASSESSMEN T YEAR SHALL BE MADE SEPARATELY ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDIN GS OF THE SEARCH AND ANY OTHER MATERIAL EXISTING OR BROUGHT O N THE RECORD OF THE AO, (B) IN RESPECT OF NON-ABATED ASSESSMENTS, THE ASSESSMEN T WILL BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR OTHER DOCU MENTS NOT PRODUCED IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT BUT F OUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH, AND UNDISCLOSED INCOME OR UNDISCL OSED PROPERTY DISCOVERED IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH. ULTIMATELY, THE SPECIAL BENCH ANSWERED THE QUESTION AS UNDER : THUS, THE QUESTION RAISED BEFORE THE SPECIAL BENCH NO.1 IS ANSWERED AS UNDER : (A). IN ASSESSMENT THAT ARE ABATED, THE ASSESSING O FFICER RETAINS THE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION AS WELL AS JURISD ICTION CONFERRED ON HIM UNDER SECTION 153A FOR WHICH ASSES SMENTS SHALL BE MADE FOR EACH OF THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS SEPARATELY; (B) IN OTHER CASES, IN ADDITION TO THE INCOME THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED, THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A WI LL BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, WHICH IN TH E CONTEXT OF ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 13 RELEVANT PROVISIONS MEANS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, OTHER DOCUMENTS, FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH BUT NOT PRODUCED IN T HE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT, AND UNDISCLOSED INCOME OR PROP ERTY DISCOVERED IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 10.2 PRIOR TO THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BEN CH, ITAT, INDORE IN THE CASE OF RAJAT TRADECOM INDIA (P) LTD. VS. DCIT, 120 ITD 48, CONSIDERING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A HELD THAT ONCE THE WARRANT OF AUTHORIZ ATION OR REQUISITION IS ISSUED AND SEARCH IS CONDUCTED, PANCHNAMA IS DRAWN, THE CO MPLETION OF ASSESSMENT FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS WOULD GET REOPENED IRRESPECTIV E OF WHETHER ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND OR NOT IN RELATION TO A PARTICUL AR ASSESSMENT YEAR. SAME VIEW IS TAKEN BY THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH IN THE CASE OF D R. MANSUKH KANJIBHAI SHAH VS. ACIT, 129 ITD 376. HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ACTION ELECTRONICS, 258 ITR 188 HELD THAT THE AMOUNT DISCO VERED DURING THE SEARCH AND SURRENDER REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PROPER. E STIMATED ASSESSMENT ON PREVIOUS YEAR BASIS IS JUSTIFIED. HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BIMAL KUMAR ANANT KUMAR, 288 ITR 278 HELD THAT WHEN CASH CREDIT WAS SURRENDERED AND THERE IS ABSENCE OF STOCK REGISTER, REJECTION OF BO OKS OF ACCOUNT IS JUSTIFIED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ALL THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEALS REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF PURCHASE AND SAL ES, ITEM-WISE, QUANTITY-WISE, QUALITY-WISE WITH VALUATION AND G.P. RATE AND RECON CILIATION FOR CORRESPONDING PURCHASES ALONG WITH VALUATION OF STOCK WITH SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTS AND PURITY AND ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 14 COMPLETE STOCK REGISTER, BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT F URNISHED, THE DETAILS OF PURCHASES AND SALES, QUANTITY-WISE, QUALITY WISE AND ITEM-WIS E. THE DETAILS OF VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK AND RECONCILIATION WERE ALSO NOT FURN ISHED. THEREFORE, BOOK RESULTS OF THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNVERIFIABLE AND WERE FOUND N OT RELIABLE. FURTHER IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, SILVER JEWELLERY AND ARTIC LES WERE FOUND BY THE POLICE AND REQUISITIONED BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE SEIZED MATERIA L WAS TAKEN INTO POSSESSION BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS SURRENDERED AND OFFERED THE FULL VALUE OF JEWELLERY AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, WOULD CLEARLY SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE WA S NOT ABLE TO SATISFY THE AO ABOUT THE CORRECTNESS AND COMPLETENESS OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO ALTERNATE WITH THE AO, BUT TO REJECT T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE U/S. 145(3) OF THE IT ACT. SINCE IN THESE YEARS, THE RETURNS WERE ALSO FILED AFTER SEARCH, THEREFORE, THE DECISION OF ITAT, MUMB AI SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. VS. DY. CIT (SUPRA) AND OTHER DECISIONS CITED ABOVE WOULD CLEARLY APPLY AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. SIN CE THE RETURNS FOR THESE YEARS WERE PENDING AS FILED BELATEDLY AT THE TIME OF ASSE SSMENT, THEREFORE, THE AO WOULD RETAIN THE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION AS WELL AS JURISDI CTION CONFERRED U/S. 153A, IN WHICH ASSESSMENT SHALL BE MADE FOR EACH OF THESE YEARS SE PARATELY. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO NEED OF RECOVERY OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AGAI NST THE ASSESSEE FOR COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT U/S. 153A OF THE IT ACT. THE LD. CIT( A) WAS, THEREFORE, NOT JUSTIFIED ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 15 IN DELETING THE ENTIRE ADDITIONS HOLDING THAT THERE WAS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF SEA RCH OR REQUISITION. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THUS, CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN LAW. N OW THE QUESTION LEFT IS AS TO WHAT REASONABLE PROFIT CAN BE ESTIMATED AND ADDED TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 10.3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED VARIOUS ITEMS IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH BY THE ASSESSEE AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE LIKE THE DETAILS OF PURCHASES AND SALES, QUANTITY-WISE, QUALITY-WISE AND ITEM-WISE WERE NOT FURNISHED. THE DETAILS OF OPENING AND CLOSING STOCK QUANTITY-WISE, QUALITY-WISE AND ITEM-WISE WERE NOT FURNISHED. RECONCILIATION OF COR RESPONDING PURCHASES AND SALES WERE NOT SUBJECTED TO VERIFICATION. THE DETAILS OF RATE SUPPLIED WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, PURITY AND STOCK REGISTER WERE NOT PRODU CED. IT HAS RESULTED INTO THE FACT THAT THE DETAILS NOTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT REMA INED UNVERIFIABLE. THE AO WAS, THEREFORE, JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT CORRECTNESS AN D COMPLETENESS OF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DOUBTFUL AND NOT SUBJECTED TO VERI FICATION. THEREFORE, SAME WERE RIGHTLY REJECTED U/S. 145 (3) OF THE IT ACT. THE AO , THEREFORE, ESTIMATED THE SALES ON STOCK TURNOVER OF 1 : 12, MEANING THEREBY THE TU RNOVER OF THE YEAR IS PROPORTIONATE TO 12 MONTHS STOCK, WHICH IS NORMAL MARKET TREND AND APPLIED THE PROFIT RATE OF 22% UNIFORMLY IN ASSESSMENT YEARS AN D MADE THE ADDITIONS AS NOTED ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 16 IN THIS ORDER ABOVE. THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, RIGHT LY FOUND THAT THERE IS NO BASIS OF THE AO TO APPLY STOCK TURNOVER RATIO AND GROSS PROF IT RATE OF 22% TO MAKE ADDITION. THE TRADING RESULTS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 153A ARE THE SAME AS SHOWN IN THE ORIGINAL RET URN FILED IN DUE COURSE FOR EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER FOUN D THAT IN THE CASE OF SRINIWAS AGARWAL, SIMILAR ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED BY HIM U /S. 153A OF THE IT ACT AND THE ORDERS IN THEIR CASES HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE TR IBUNAL. THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER FOUND THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOUND OR SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF REQUISITION AND POST OP ERATION ENQUIRY JUSTIFYING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO TO THE RETURNED INCOME. TH E LD. CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF FINDINGS RELIED UPON THE DECISIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ANIL KUMAR BHATIA VS. ACIT. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO NOTED THAT IN RESPECT OF COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS, WHETHER U/S. 143(1)(A) OR 143(3), NO ADDITION COUL D BE MADE IF NO INCRIMINATING OR UNDISCLOSED MATERIAL IS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO NOTE THAT EXCEPT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002- 03, 2003-04 IN WHICH RETURN OF INCOME HAVE BEEN FILED ON 23.09.2003, THE RETURN OF INCOME IN REMAINING ASSESSMENT YEARS FROM A.Y. 2004-05 TO 2007-08 HAVE BEEN FILED ON 01.10.2007 AS PER THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RETURN FILED BY THE LD. C OUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THUS, THE PRINCIPLE DECIDED IN THE CA SE OF ANIL KUMAR BHATIA (SUPRA) WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 17 2007-08 AND THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A AND LATER DECISION PRONO UNCED BY ITAT MUMBAI SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGIS TICS LTD. (SUPRA) AND FOR THAT THERE WAS NO NEED FOR RECOVERY OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO U/S. 15 3A OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DELETING THE ADD ITION IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 TO 2007-08 CANNOT BE APPROVED AND THE SAME ARE SET ASIDE TO THAT EXTENT BY RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH ABOVE. FURTH ER, IT IS A FACT THAT THERE WAS NO BASIS OR JUSTIFICATION TO HAVE UNIFORMLY TAKEN THE STOCK TURNOVER RATIO OR APPLYING G.P. RATE OF 22% FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADDITION. THE T OTAL TURNOVER DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE PROFIT THEREON AS NOTED ABOVE WOUL D CLEARLY JUSTIFY THAT THE AO HAS MADE UNREASONABLE, EXORBITANT ADDITIONS ABOVE W ITHOUT ANY BASIS. THEREFORE, THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO TO THE RETURNED INCOME CANNOT BE APPROVED. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE ADDITIONS MAD E BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 & 2003-04 AND DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A ) SHOULD NOT BE DISTURBED IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF ITAT SPECIAL BENCH IN THE C ASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. AND THE DECISION OF ITAT, DELHI BENC H IN THE CASE OF ANIL KUMAR BHATIA (SUPRA). HOWEVER, IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-0 5 TO 2007-08, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF REQUISITION OR POST OPERATION ENQUIRIES A ND CONSIDERING THE OBJECTIONS OF ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 18 THE AO, IT WOULD BE REASONABLE AND PROPER TO DIRECT THE AO TO MAKE ADDITIONS OF RS.50,000/- EACH IN ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS IN ORD ER TO DO JUSTICE BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) /AO IS, THEREF ORE, MODIFIED TO THE EXTENT THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 TO 2007-08, THE ADDITION OF RS.50,000/- EACH WOULD BE MADE INSTEAD OF ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO. IN THE RE SULT, ALL THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE. ITA NO. 330/AGRA/2011 (A.Y. 2008-09) : 11. THIS DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), GWALIOR DATED 18.05.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, C HALLENGING THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.12,20,758/- O N ACCOUNT OF GROSS PROFIT. THE FACTS ARE SAME AS NOTED ABOVE IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS EXCEPT THAT IN THIS CASE, REGULAR ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) HAS BEEN PASSED VIDE ORDER DATED 10.12.2009. THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME AT RS.4.09.988 U/S. 139 OF THE IT ACT ON 31.03.2009. THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED INCOME FROM W HOLESALE BUSINESS OF JEWELLERY AND DECLARED SALES OF RS.33,69,986/- DISC LOSING GROSS PROFIT OF RS.11.28%. THE ASSESSEE HAS SURRENDERED RS.2,05,771 /- ON ACCOUNT OF VALUE OF JEWELLERY AS FOUND IN THE REQUISITION MADE U/S. 132 A FROM THE POLICE AUTHORITIES ON 07.08.2007. THE AO RECORDED SAME REASONS FOR REJECT ION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS NOTED ABOVE. THE AO ON THE SAME BASIS OF STOCK TURN OVER RATIO AS APPLIED IN THE ITA NO. 324 TO 330/AGRA/2011 19 EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS ALSO APPLIED THE PROFIT RA TE OF 22% AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.12,20,758/- ON ACCOUNT OF GROSS PROFIT. THE L D. CIT(A) CONSIDERING HIS FINDING AND REASONS GIVEN IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSME NT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2007-08 DELETED THE ENTIRE ADDITION. CONSIDERING THE REASON S FOR DECISION GIVEN IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS, AS NOTED ABOVE, WE MODIFY THE ORD ERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DIRECT THE AO TO MAKE ADDITION OF RS.50,000/- O N ACCOUNT OF PROFIT RATE IN RESPECT OF HUGE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION AND PARTICULARLY WHEN THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING T HE ENTIRE ADDITION. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED, AS INDIC ATED ABOVE. 12. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY