ACIT, Jaipur V. SHAKUN ADVERTISING P LTD., Jaipur

ITA 352/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5226 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 05-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROSHANTA MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: S L PODDAR ADV DHK
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Income from undisclosed sources; Loose papers; Retraction
• Section: 153A; 37(1)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF; D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA -@ ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD., B-3, GIRIRAJ MANSION, 1 ST FLOOR, NEW COLONY, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO. AABCS 9742 H VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : MS. ROSHANTA MEENA (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.L. PODDAR (ADV) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 06/05/2016. MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15/06/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER T.R. MEENA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04/01/2013 OF THE LEARNED C.I.T.(A) (CENTRAL), JAIPU R FOR A.Y. 2009-10. THE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE REPRODUCED AS UN DER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD CIT(A), CENTRAL, JAIPUR, DESPITE CONFIRMING THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT U/S 145(3) OF THE IT ACT, HAS ERRED IN REDUCING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2 CR MADE BY THE AO TO RS. 10,57,940/-THEREBY 2 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 1,89,42,060/-, IGNORING THE F ACT THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WHILE ESTIMATING THE PROFIT BARELY COVERS THE DISCLOSURE MADE BY THE MAIN DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY, IN SWORN STATEMENT U/S 132(4) OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE ID. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN REDUCING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 CR MADE BY THE AO TO RS. 10,57,940/- HOLDING THAT THE NP RATE OF CURRENT YEAR IS BETTER AS COMPARED TO EARLIER YEAR IGNORING VARIOUS FACTORS CONSIDERED BY THE AO BEFORE MAKING THE ADDITION, INCLUDING THE FACT OF DISCLOSURE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, ITS FAILURE TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE EXPENSES OF MUCH HIGHER AMOUNT AND SPECIFIC FACTS IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN CONCERNS, PAYMENTS TO WHOM WERE ADMITTEDLY USED BY THE ASSESSEE TO INFLATE EXPENSES. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE DISALLOWANCES MADE U/S 37(1) OF THE I.T. ACT WAS PROPER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE OTHERWISE. 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS, ON FACT S THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO ERRED IN NOT CONFIRMING ADDITION EVEN TO THE EXTENT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME ADMITTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF ASSESSEE COMPANY IN HIS SWORN STATEMENT U/S 132(4) OF THE I.T. ACT BUT NOT SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME I.E. RS.1.97 CRORE, THOUGH IT HAS NOT EVEN GIVEN BASIS OF INCLUSION OF UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF RS.1 CRORE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME ALSO. 3 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. 2. THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN ON 29/09/2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,68,38,070/-. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVE D THAT A SEARCH/SEIZURE WAS CONDUCTED ON 06/8/2008 IN THE CASE OF SHAKUN GRO UP OF JAIPUR TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE BELONGS. VARIOUS ASSETS/BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND AND SEIZED AS PER ANNEXURE PREP ARED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. ACCORDINGLY, NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) WAS ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 30/01/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 TO 2008- 09. RETURN DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 1,68,38,070/- WAS FILED ON 2 9/09/2009 WHICH INCLUDES SURRENDER OF RS. 1.00 CRORE. THE COMPANY DE RIVED INCOME FROM BUSINESS OF ADVERTISEMENT MAKING AND PUBLICITY WORK. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS WORKING AS AN AGENT FOR COLLECTING THE AD VERTISEMENT BUSINESS AND PREPARING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR PUBLISHING IN T HE NEWS PAPER ETC. IN LIEU OF THESE SERVICES IS GETTING COMMISSION. ALL T HE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AGAINST DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER AT RS. 2.00 CRORES AND DELETED BY THE LD CIT(A). THE LD. ASS ESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED ADVERTISEME NT PURCHASES OF RS. 43,80,83,444/- AGAINST ADVERTISEMENT SALES OF RS. 4 5,27,70,370/-. IN ADDITION TO THIS ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES OF RS. 1,1 3,99,630/- WHICH INCLUDES CONSULTANCY CHARGES, SALES PROMOTION AND T RAVELLING EXPENSES. 4 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. THESE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED ON PURCHASE OF ADVERTIS EMENT SITES, MAKING OF HOARDING, INSTALLMENT AND COMMISSION PAID TO BROKERS. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED TOTAL ADVERTISEMENT EXPENSES A T RS. 2,18,28,737/- AND OTHER EXPENSES OF RS. 41,62,54,706/-. HE GAVE S HOW CAUSE NOTICE TO VERIFY THE PURCHASES MADE. IN RESPONSE TO THIS QUER Y, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LIST OF CREDITORS, COPY OF ACCOU NTS IN CASE OF FEW PERSONS HAVING TRANSACTIONS EXCEEDING RS. 10 LACS B UT FULL DETAILS HAVE NOT BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE OBTAINE D THE SITES FROM THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND FROM AUTONOMOUS BODI ES, NEWS PAPERS/NEWS CHANNELS AND CLAIMED PURCHASE OF MATERI AL FOR FABRICATION OF THE DISPLAY BOARD ITEMS. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FU RNISH THE BIFURCATION OF EXPENSES TO GET THEM VERIFIED WITH TH E HELP OF BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND OTHER RECORDS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESS EE. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT MAINTAINE D STOCK REGISTER ITEM- WISE AND SITE-WISE. IT IS NOT ASCERTAINABLE THAT EXPE NSES CLAIMED WERE WITH REFERENCE TO REVENUE GENERATED. THE REQUISITE D ETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT SHOW THAT THE COMMISSION PAID FOR THE SERVICE RENDERED BY THEM. FURTHER ADVERTISEMENT COMMISSION PAID FROM PERSON TO PERSON WAS VARIED FROM PERSON TO PERSON. THE MATERIAL PURCHASED WAS CLAIMED ON THE BASIS OF SELF MADE VOUCHERS. IN AUDI T REPORT ALSO, THE 5 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. AUDITOR HAD COMMENTED THAT WE HAVE OBTAINED ALL THE INFORMATION AND EXPLANATIONS EXCEPTING FEW SUPPORTING AND EVIDENCES OF EXPENDITURE, WHICH TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF WERE NEC ESSARY FOR THE PURPOSE OF OUR AUDIT. 2.1 ON THIS BASIS/DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER, HE PROPOSED TO REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT U/S 145(3 ) OF THE ACT. HE FURTHER HELD THAT STATEMENT OF SHRI BALLABH DAS MAH ESHWARI RECORDED DURING THE SEARCH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT ON 07/8/200 8. IN REPLY TO QUESTION NOS. 13 AND 14, HE HAD ADMITTED THAT EXPEN SES HAD BEEN INFLATED IN THEIR CONCERNS NAMELY SHAKUN ADVERTISIN G PVT. LTD., N.S. PUBLICITY AGENCIES, SGM COMMUNICATION AND M/S LEAD ETC.. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REPRODUCED QUESTION NO. 13 AN D 14 ON PAGE NO. 4 AND 5 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. SIMILAR ADMISSION WAS MADE BY SHRI BALLABH DAS MAHESHWARI IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 9, W HICH HAS BEEN REPRODUCED ON PAGE NO. 5 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. A FTER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS, THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER APPLIED PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT BY RELYING ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- (I) LACHMINARAYAN MADAN LAL VS. CIT, 86 ITR 436 (SC) . (II) SWADESHI COTTON MILLS CO. LTD. VS CIT (1967) 63 ITR 57 (SC). 6 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. (III) ASSAM PESTICIDE AND AGRO CHEMICALS VS. CIT 2 27 ITR 846 (GAU). HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SHRI BALLABH DAS MAHESHWARI DURING THE SEARCH IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 9, SURRENDER OF RS. 2.97 C RORES ON ACCOUNT OF INFLATED EXPENSES OUTSTANDING IN THE BOOKS, OUT OF WHICH A SURRENDER OF RS. 1.00 CORES WAS ALONE MADE. FURTHER IT WAS MENTION ED THAT PERSONS OWING M/S SIXTH SENSE COMMUNICATION AND KRITIKA ADVE RTISEMENT, MUMBAI WERE DUMMY CONCERNS IN THE NAME OF AN EMPLOYEE OF TH E ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE. IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE SURV EY AT MUMBAI OFFICE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE PERSONS HAVE ADMITTED DOING NO BU SINESS AND ONLY EXPENSES OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS ROUTED THROUGH THE IR ACCOUNT. A SUM OF RS. 31,37,023/- IS APPEARING OUTSTANDING AS ON 31/3 /2009. SIMILARLY A SUM OF RS. 89,36,231/- WAS APPEARING OUTSTANDING IN THE NAME OF SIXTH SENSE COMMUNICATION. SHRI BALLABH DAS MAHESHWARI IN HIS STATEMENT REFERRED TO ABOVE HAS ADMITTED BOGUS EXPENSES BOOKE D IN THE NAME OF ABOVE MENTIONED CONCERNS. BESIDES THIS, THERE ARE N UMBER OF COMPANIES WHOSE NAMES, LIABILITY HAD BEEN SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE , WHICH HAS BEEN TABULATED ON PAGE 7 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE TOT AL SUCH PARTIES WERE IDENTIFIED 12 IN NUMBERS. IT IS FURTHER HELD THAT T HIS LIST OF BOGUS PERSONS WAS ONLY AN ILLUSTRATION NOT EXHAUSTIVE. REQUIRED CO NFIRMATION HAD NOT BEEN SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BE FORE THE ASSESSING 7 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. OFFICER. THESE EXPENSES RECODED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCO UNT ARE REMAINED TO BE UNVERIFIABLE. THEREFORE, HE DISALLOWED RS. 2.00 CR ORES U/S 37(1) OF THE ACT ON ESTIMATE BASIS. THE DISALLOWANCE GOT SUPPORT F ROM THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WHERE SURRENDER OF RS. 2.97 CRORES WA S MADE BUT ONLY RS. 1.00 CRORE WAS DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN. FURTHER IN T HE STATEMENT REFERRED TO ABOVE AND IN LETTER FILED ON 02/9/2008 SINGED BY SHRI BALLABH DAS MAHESHWARI AND SHRI S.L. PODDAR, COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE, A SUM OF RS. 75.00 LACS WAS OFFERED TO TAX DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN HOUSE PROPERTY CONSTRUCTED AT 4-5, SHUBHAM ENCLAVE, C-SCHEME, JAIPUR. THE INCOME OFFERE D TO TAX OF RS. 1.00 CRORE TO TAKE CARE OF THE UNACCOUNTED INVESTME NT IN SAID HOUSE PROPERTY. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THAT SURPL US FUND GENERATED ON ACCOUNT OF BOOKING BOGUS EXPENSES WERE APPLIED FOR I NVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSE PROPERTY. THUS, HE MADE ADDITI ON OF RS. 2.00 CORES IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER, THE ASSESSEE THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), WHO HAD PARTLY DELET ED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SURRENDERED ADDITI ONAL INCOME ONLY RS. 1.00 CRORE IN THE RETURN, THOUGH DURING THE SEARCH, TOTAL DISCLOSURE WAS RS. 2.97 CRORES. AS REGARDS THE RETRACTION FROM THE SURRENDER, THE 8 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. APPELLANTS CASE IS THAT THE ADDITION CANNOT BE MAD E ON THE BASIS OF SOLE STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE AND UNLESS THE STATEMENT WAS S UBSTANTIATED BY ANY MATERIAL GATHERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE APPELLANT EVEN CONFRONTED THAT STATEMENT OF ONE DIRECTOR WAS RECORD ED BY THE SEARCH TEAM BY STATING WRONG FACT OF ALLEGED STATEMENT OF ONE SHRI RAVI CHAPPERWAL OF M/S SIXTH SENSE COMMUNICATIONS RECORDE D DURING SURVEY AT THEIR PREMISES AT MUMBAI INASMUCH AS SHRI CHAPPE RWAL CLEARLY ADMITTED THAT HIS CONCERN WAS PROVIDED SERVICES TO T HE APPELLANT COMPANY BUT IN A PARTICULAR QUESTION, ANSWER WAS RECORDED IN A MANNER AS SHRI CHAPPERWAL WAS ADMITTED THAT NO SERVICES WERE PROVIDED BY M/S SIXTH SENSE COMMUNICATIONS TO THE APPELLANT COMPANY. IT I S FURTHER STATED THAT AS SOON AS SHRI CHAPPERWAL TO NOTICE AS SUCH QUESTIO N/ANSWER HE IMMEDIATELY FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF HIS RETRACTION OF HIS STATEMENT AS RECORDED UNDER ANSWER NO. 13 BUT THE SEARCH PARTY R ECORDED STATEMENT OF THE DIRECTOR STATEMENT OF SHRI CHAPPERWAL PARTICULA RLY OF QUESTION/ANSWER NO. 13. THE APPELLANT HAS ACCORDINGLY CLAIMED THAT E VEN THE STATEMENT OF SURRENDER OF THE DIRECTOR IN RESPECT OF INFLATION O F EXPENSE AND SURRENDER OF INCOME OF RS. 2.97 CRORE WAS RECORDED IN THE BACK GROUND WRONG FACTS OF STATEMENT OF SHRI CHAPPERWAL. HOWEVER, THERE IS N O DOUBT FOR DISPUTE ON THE ISSUE THAT IN RESPECT OF A.Y. 2009-10 AS REG ARDS THE SPECIFIC 9 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. SURRENDER OF RS. 2.97 CRORES ON ACCOUNT OF INFLATIO N OF EXPENSES THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC SURRENDER OF RS. 2.97 CRORES ON ACCOUNT OF INFLATION OF EXPENSES AND THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC SIZED RECORD FOR ANY OTHER RELEVANT MATERIAL TO SUPPORT SUCH SURRENDER. IN THIS CONNEC TION, IT MAY BE NOTED THAT IT IS A SETTLED LAW THAT THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) ARE DEFINITELY HAVING EVIDENTIARY VALUE BUT THE SAME CA NNOT SAID TO BE A CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE AND THE ASSESSEE HAS RIGHT TO R ETRACT FROM THE SAME IN SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES. HE RELIED UPON THE FOLLO WING CASE LAWS:- (I) ALAPATY VENKATA RAMIAH VS. CIT 57 ITR 185 (SC). (II) PULLANGODE RUBBER PRODUCE COMPANY LTD. VS STA TE OF KERALA AND ANR. 91 ITR 0018 (SC). (III) CIT VS. ASHOK KUMAR SONI 291 ITR 172 (RAJ)(HC) . (IV) SH. DHANRAJ SONI VS ACIT, BIKANER, JAIPUR BENC H ITA NO. 1722/JP/1994 DATED 22/07/1996. (V) M/S MAHESHWARI INDUSTRIES JODHPUR VS ACIT, ITA N O. 845/JP/95 DATED 06/10/2003. (VI) JINDAL STAINLESS LTD. VS ACIT (2009) 120 ITD 30 1. HE FURTHER REFERRED CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 286/2003-IT (INV) DATED 10/3/2003 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT WHILE RE CORDING THE STATEMENT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATION, NO ATTEMPT SHOULD BE MADE TO OBTAIN THE CONFESSION AS TO UNDISCLOSED IN COME. IN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ALSO, A.O. SHOULD RELY ON EVIDENCE/MATE RIAL GATHERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATION. THEREFORE, HE HELD T HAT MERELY ADMISSION MADE U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT WITHOUT CORROBORATIVE EVI DENCES, NO ADDITION 10 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. CAN BE JUSTIFIED. HOWEVER, HE CONFIRMED THE APPLICAT ION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE ACT BY RELYING ON THE VARIOUS DECISIONS. THEREAFTER, HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 10,57,940/-. 4. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD DR HAS VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AR GUED THAT THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) HAS EVIDENTIARY VALUE UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT. THIS GROUP HAS SURRENDERED ADDITIONAL INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF INFLATED EXPENSES, THEREFORE, THIS YEAR ALSO, THE A SSESSEE SHOULD HONOUR THE DISCLOSURE MADE BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. NUMBER OF INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, ON WHICH THIS DISCLOSURE WAS MADE BUT LAT ER OF THE ASSESSEE HAD RETRACTED PARTLY FROM THE DISCLOSURE. . 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS REI TERATED THE ARGUMENTS MADE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). HE FURTHER SUBM ITTED THAT THERE WAS A DISCLOSURE U/S 132(4) BY THE DIRECTORS BUT WHIC H WAS GIVEN IN THE BACKGROUND OF STATEMENT RECORDED BY SHRI RAVI CHAPP ERWAL, PROPRIETOR OF M/S SIXTH SENSE COMMUNICATIONS DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, CONDUCTED ON BUSINESS PREMISES AT MUMBAI. HE FURTHER ARGUED T HAT SHRI RAVI CHAPPERWAL IN HIS STATEMENT NEVER STATED THAT HE HAD NOT PROVIDED ANY 11 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. SERVICES TO M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING P. LTD. AND THAT WRONG FACTS WERE STATED BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY SHRI BALL ABH DAS MAHESHWARI FOR OBTAINING FORCED SURRENDER OF INCOME. AS SOON A S THESE FACTS CAME TO NOTICE OF SH. CHAPPERWAL, HE IMMEDIATELY FILED AN AF FIDAVIT AND RETRACTION LETTER BEFORE THE ADIT, JAIPUR. THE AFFIDAVIT FILED B Y SH. CHAPPERWAL HAS NOT BEEN CONTROVERTED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. THE COPY OF RETRACTION LETTER AND AFFIDAVIT HAD BEEN FILED BEFORE THE LD C IT(A) DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. HE FURTHER RELIED ON THE CAS E LAWS REFERRED BY THE LD CIT(A), WHICH STRONGLY SUPPORT THE ASSESSEES CAS E. ACCORDINGLY, HE HAS PRAYED TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. DURING TH E COURSE OF SEARCH, STATEMENT U/S 132(4) WAS RECORDED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICERS. SHRI BALLABH DAS MAHESHWARI HAD ADMITTED ADDITIONAL INCOM E AT RS. 2.97 CRORES ON THE BASIS OF LOOSE PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS F OUND AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES AT DELHI, MUMBAI AND AHMADABAD AS HE WAS NO T ABLE TO GET VERIFICATION FROM THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FROM THE FAMILY MEMBERS AND BUSINESS CONCERNS. HOWEVER, IN RETURN, HE HAS AD MITTED ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 1.00 CRORE, WHICH INCLUDES DISCLOSURE OF RS. 75 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN HOUSE PROPERTY CONSTRUCTED AT 4-5, 12 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. SHUBHAM ENCLAVE, C-SCHEME, JAIPUR. THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132( 4) ARE NOT ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, AS SUCH NO REFERENCE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSESSMENT ORDER. HE SIMPLY GAVE GENERAL OBSERVATION OF THE GROUP THA T DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, VARIOUS ASSETS/BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE FOUND A ND SEIZED AS PER ANNEXURE PREPARED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THERE AFTER, HE ANALYSED THE EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD CONSULTANCY CHARGES, SA LES PROMOTION, TRAVELLING EXPENSES, PURCHASES MATERIAL FOR ADVERTI SEMENT AND ALSO CONSIDERED NOT MAINTAINING STOCK REGISTER AND COMMI SSION PAYMENT NOT VERIFIABLE BUT NO SPECIFIC BILLS VOUCHERS HAVE BEEN REFERRED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE EXPENSES CLAIMED AND COM MISSION PAID IS BOGUS ON THE BASIS OF SEIZED MATERIAL. WHATEVER ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT RECORDED DURING T HE COURSE OF SEARCH U/S 132(4) WHICH HAVE EVIDENTIARY VALUE BUT IT IS RE BUTTABLE. THE CBDT ALSO ISSUED INSTRUCTION ON FORCED DISCLOSURE DURING THE SURVEY AND SEARCH, WHICH HAS BEEN REFERRED BY THE LD CIT(A) WHEREIN IT HA S CLEARLY DIRECTED BY IT TO THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, NO ATTEMPT SHOULD BE MADE TO OBTAIN THE CONFESSION, WHICH IS NOT BASED ON INCRIMINATING DOCU MENT/ASSETS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE LD DR HAS NOT CONTR OVERTED THE FINDINGS 13 ITA NO. 352/JP/2013 ACIT VS M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD. GIVEN BY THE LD CIT(A). THE CASE LAWS REFERRED BY TH E LD CIT(A) ARE SQUARELY APPLICABLE ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ASSESSEES CASE. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE REVENUES APPEAL. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15/06/2016. SD/- SD/- YFYR DQEKJ VH-VKJ-EHUK (LALIET KUMAR) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 15 TH JUNE, 2015 RANJAN* VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- M/S SHAKUN ADVERTISING PVT. LTD., JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.352/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR