The Income Tax Officer, MANSA V. Sh. Harbhagwan Dass Mittal, Budhlada

ITA 431/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 85971 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 18-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SSH P N ARORA; PARSHOTAM K SINGLA S
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Income from undisclosed sources; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause
• Section: 142(1); 133(6); 69; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.432(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN :AAAHH5584G INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF WARD 1(4), MANSA. BUDHLADA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.42(ASR)/2013 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.432(ASR)/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN :AAAHH5584G SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF VS. INCOME TAX OFFI CER, BUDHLADA. WARD 1(4), MANSA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.430(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN :ACMPM1563A INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL PROP. WARD 1(4), MANSA. M/S. ARJAN DASS & SONS, ANAJ MANDI, BUDHLADA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.41(ASR)/2013 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A. NO.430(ASR)/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN :ACMPM1563A SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL PROP. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 2 M/S. ARJAN DASS & SONS, WARD 1(4), MANSA. ANAJ MANDI, BUDHLADA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.431(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN :ACMPH1564H INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, WARD 1(4), MANSA. BUDHLADA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:S/SH. P.N.ARORA & PARSHOTAM K. SINGLA, ADVOCATES RESPONDENT BY:SMT. NEERAJ SHARMA, DR DATE OF HEARING:18/02/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:26/02/2015 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE THREE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARISE FROM THRE E DIFFERENT ORDERS OF CIT(A), BATHINDA, EACH DATED 28.03.2013 IN THE C ASES OF SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL HUF, SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL & SH. HARBHAGW AN DASS MITTAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE ASSESSEES IN THE C ASE OF SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF & SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL HAVE ALSO FI LED CROSS OBJECTIONS. 2. THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS M ITTAL, HUF ( ITA NO.432(ASR)/2013) HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A), HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.53 ,19,139/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 56(2)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 3 ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED AT A THE RE CEIPT COUNTER OF INCOME-TAX OFFICE, MANSA ON 26.12.2011 AFTER THE FINALIZATION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 144 OF THE I.T.AC T, 1961 I.E. ASSESSMENT WAS MADE ON 23.12.2011. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE AD DITION OF RS.12,36,000/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 69 OF THE ACT BY ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED AT THE RECEIPT COUNTE R OF THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT ON 26.12.2012 WHEREAS ASSESSM ENT WAS MADE U/S 144 OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 23.12.2012 .S 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE FILED ON 26.12.2012 AT THE RECEIPT COUNTER OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, MANSA AS WELL AS WITHOUT VERIFYING THE SAME WITH T HE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE EX-PART E U/S 144 OF THE ACT BY PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. ALL THE ABOVE MENTIONED ADDITIONS WERE DELETED B Y THE LD. CIT(A) MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ADMISSION OF ADDITION AL EVIDENCE FILED AT THE RECEIPT COUNTER OF INCOME TAX OFFICE, MANSA ON 26.12.2012 THAT TOO WITHOUT VERIFYING THE ADDITIONA L EVIDENCE WITH THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS THE ASSESSEE NEITHER PRODUCED HIS REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT DURING THE CO URSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOR AT THE TIME OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WHEREAS THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE EX-PAR TE U/S 144 ON 23.12.2011. 5. THAT IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A) BE SET ASIDE AND THE OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN C.O. NO.42(ASR)/2013 (SH.HARBHAG WAN DASS MITTAL, HUF) HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY HOLDING THAT AS PER AMENDMENT OF SECT ION 292BB THE SERVICE OF NOTICE CAN ONLY BE CHALLENGED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS DULY CHALLENGED THE JURISDICTION OF THE AO. AS SUCH, SERVICE ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 4 OF ANY NOTICE AND THE ASSESSMENT WITHOUT PROPER JUR ISDICTION IS INVALID AND VOID ABINITIO. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRO DUCED ANY EVIDENCE ON ACCOUNT OF APPROVAL GIVEN BY THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1, BATHINDA BEFORE FINALIZATION OF ASSESSMENT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT AS PER GUIDELINES OF THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES THE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED IN THE CASES SELECTED MANUALLY. AS SUCH, ASSESSMENT FRAMED IS BAD IN LAW, HENCE, LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUN DS OF APPEAL. 4. THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL ( ITA NO.430(ASR)/2013) HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A), HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.60 ,08,228/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 56(2)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED AT A THE RE CEIPT COUNTER OF INCOME-TAX OFFICE, MANSA ON 26.12.2011 AFTER THE FINALIZATION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 144 OF THE I.T.AC T, 1961 I.E. ASSESSMENT WAS MADE ON 23.12.2011. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE FILED ON 26.12.2012 AT THE RECEIPT COUNTER OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, MANSA AS WELL AS WITHOUT VERIFYING THE SAME WITH T HE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE EX-PART E U/S 144 OF THE ACT BY PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ABOVE MENTIONED ADDITION WAS DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A) MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVID ENCE FILED AT THE RECEIPT COUNTER OF INCOME TAX OFFICE, MANSA ON 26.12.2012 THAT TOO WITHOUT VERIFYING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WITH THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS THE ASSESSEE NEITHER P RODUCED HIS REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSES SMENT ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 5 PROCEEDINGS NOR AT THE TIME OF APPELLATE PROCEEDING S WHEREAS THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE EX-PARTE U/S 144 ON 23.12.2 011. 4. THAT IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A) BE SET ASIDE AND THE OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 5. THE ASSESSEE IN C.O. NO.41(ASR)/2013 (SMT. SUSHI LA MITTAL,) HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY HOLDING THAT AS PER AMENDMENT OF SECT ION 292BB THE SERVICE OF NOTICE CAN ONLY BE CHALLENGED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS DULY CHALLENGED THE JURISDICTION OF THE AO. AS SUCH, SERVICE OF ANY NOTICE AND THE ASSESSMENT WITHOUT PROPER JUR ISDICTION IS INVALID AND VOID ABINITIO. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRO DUCED ANY EVIDENCE ON ACCOUNT OF APPROVAL GIVEN BY THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-1, BATHINDA BEFORE FINALIZATION OF ASSESSMENT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT AS PER GUIDELINES OF THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES THE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED IN THE CASES SELECTED MANUALLY. AS SUCH, ASSESSMENT FRAMED IS BAD IN LAW, HENCE, LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 3. THAT THE PRESENT APPEAL MADE TO THE HONBLE ITAT BY THE ITO, WARD 1(4, MANSA IS ILLEGAL AND VOID ABINITIO AS HE DOES NOT HOLD JURISDICTION OVER THE ASSESSEE AS ADMITTED BY THE AO HIMSELF IN THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE CIT(A ) AS WELL AS STATEMENT OF FACTS TO THIS APPEAL. THEREFORE, THE A PPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROU NDS OF APPEAL. 6. THE REVENUE IN THE CASE OF SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS M ITTAL, ( ITA NO.431(ASR)/2013) HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 6 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A), HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.34 ,44,348/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 56(2)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED AT A THE RE CEIPT COUNTER OF INCOME-TAX OFFICE, MANSA ON 26.12.2011 AFTER THE FINALIZATION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 144 OF THE I.T.AC T, 1961 I.E. ASSESSMENT WAS MADE ON 23.12.2011. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE AD DITION OF RS.18,01,652/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 69 OF THE ACT BY ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED AT THE RECEIPT COUNTE R OF THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT ON 26.12.2012 WHEREAS ASSESSM ENT WAS MADE U/S 144 OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 23.12.2012 .S 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE FILED ON 26.12.2012 AT THE RECEIPT COUNTER OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, MANSA AS WELL AS WITHOUT VERIFYING THE SAME WITH T HE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE EX-PART E U/S 144 OF THE ACT BY PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. ALL THE ABOVE MENTIONED ADDITIONS WERE DELETED B Y THE LD. CIT(A) MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ADMISSION OF ADDITION AL EVIDENCE FILED AT THE RECEIPT COUNTER OF INCOME TAX OFFICE, MANSA ON 26.12.2012 THAT TOO WITHOUT VERIFYING THE ADDITIONA L EVIDENCE WITH THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS THE ASSESSEE NEITHER PRODUCED HIS REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT DURING THE CO URSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOR AT THE TIME OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WHEREAS THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE EX-PAR TE U/S 144 ON 23.12.2011. 5. THAT IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A) BE SET ASIDE AND THE OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 7. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL AND BELONG TO THE SAME GROUP OF FAMILY MEMBERS, THEREFORE, ALL TH E APPEALS ARE BEING DECIDED TOGETHER BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 7 8. FIRST OF ALL, WE TAKE UP APPEAL IN THE CASE OF S H. HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL HUF, IN ITA NO.432(ASR)/2013 AS UNDER: 9. SH. P.N.ARORA, ADVOCATE DID NOT PRESS THE C.O. B EARING NO.42(ASR)/2013 OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, TH E SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 10. AS REGARDS REVENUES APPEAL, THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEES CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY THROUGH M ANUAL SELECTION WITH THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, RANGE-1, BATHINDA AND NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 29.0 9.2010, AS OBSERVED BY THE AO AT PAGE 1 OF THE ORDER. THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER DATED 05.09.2011 REGARDING TRANSFER OF HIS CASE TO PANCHKULA, SINCE HE HAD PERMANENTLY SHIFTED TO PANCHKULA AND HIS JURISDICTION LIES WITH THE IT O, PANCHKULA. THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE FOR TRANSFER OF THE CASE TO PANCHK ULA WAS REJECTED BY THE AO, SINCE THE CASE WAS GETTING TIME BARRED. ACCORDINGLY , THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE DETAILS AS REQUIRED UNDER SE CTION 142(1) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS ON MANY DATES AND ULTIMATELY FILED THE DETAILS LIKE COMPUTATION OF CHART, COPY OF BANK STA TEMENT, LIST OF LOANS, INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET ET C. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE A CCOUNTS PRODUCED, INCLUDING CAPITAL ACCOUNT, BALANCE SHEET AND TRADIN G ACCOUNT ETC., THE AO ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 8 OBSERVED THAT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO EXAMINE THE BO OKS OF ACCOUNT AND THEREFORE, PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENT IN THE MANNER PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT. THE AO ON PERUSAL OF THE LI ST OF UNSECURED LOANS FOR THE YEARS ENDING 31.03.2007 & 31.03.2008 AND FOR TH E IMPUGNED YEAR AND OTHER DETAILS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE, MADE THE A DDITIONS OF RS.53,19,139/- AND RS.12,36,000/-. THE NECESSARY FINDINGS OF THE AO VIDE PARA 2.4 TO 3.5 OF THE ORDER ARE REPRODUCED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENI ENCE AS UNDER: 2.4. THE PERUSAL OF BOTH THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 3 1.03.2008 AND 31.03.2009 SHOWS THAT THE NAMES OF CREDITORS ARE TH E SAME BUT IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009, THE ASSESSEE BIFURC ATED THE UNSECURED LOANS IN THREE CATEGORIES I.E. SECURED LOANS, UNSEC URED LOANS AND TRANSFERRED TO CAPITAL ACCOUNT. THE REASONS FOR BIF URCATING THE UNSECURED LOANS IN THREE CATEGORIES ARE BEST KNOWN TO THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE UNSIGNED BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2009, A S SUBMITTED, THE ASSESSEE HAS TRANSFERRED UNSECURED LOANS TO HIS CAP ITAL ACCOUNT TO THE TUNE OF RS.53,19,139/- BELONGING TO CREDITORS SH. O .P. MITTAL, AND SH. R.K.MITTAL AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. IN THE ABSENCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, THESE COULD NOT BE VERIFIED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT FURNISHED SHOWS HEAVY WITHDRAWALS IN CASH T O THE TUNE OF RS.51,70,000/- ON DIFFERENT DATES BUT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE REGARDING UTILISATION OF THESE WITHDRAWALS OR PURPOSE OF MAKING WITHDRAWALS. 2.5. FROM THIS EXERCISE OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. TRANSF ERRING UNSECURED LOANS TO HIS CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND MAKING HUGE WITHDR AWALS IN CASH, IT CAN BE INFERRED EITHER THE UNSECURED LOANS HAVE BEE N REPAID OTHER THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES OR ACCOUNT PAYEE B ANK DRAFT, IN CONTRAVENTION TO THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 269TOF I.T. ACT, 1961 OR IT WAS ASSESSEES OWN INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 2.6. AT THE TIME OF FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IN THE CASE OF SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL W/O SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS THE STATEMENT OF ONE OF THE CREDITORS SH. O.P.MITTA L WAS RECORDED ON ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 9 23.10.09. IN HIS STATEMENT, SH. O.P.MITTAL DEPOSED THAT IT IS RELEVANT TO MENTION HERE THAT SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL IS NOT IN A M OOD TO RETURN THE AMOUNT ( SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD UNSECURED LOAN IN HIS INCOME) OR PRINCIPAL AS WELL AS OF INTEREST. SIMILAR DEPOSITIO N WAS MADE BY MS. NIDHI MITTAL D/O SH.O.P.MITTAL AND SH. RAMAN MITTAL S/O SH. O.P.MITTAL IN THEIR AFFIDAVITS FILED DURING THE COU RSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE A.Y.2007-08. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE A.Y . 2007-08. DURING THE COURS E OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS UNDER CONSIDERATION STATEMENT OF SH. O. P. MITTAL WAS RECORDED BY DEPUTING THE INSPECTOR OF THIS OFFICE O N 13.12.2011. THE EXTRACT OF STATEMENT IS REPRODUCED BELOW: .. Q.2. PLEASE GIVE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF YOUR BROTH ERS AND SISTERS AND THEIR FAMILY DETAILS. ALSO PLEASE GIVEN YOUR FAMILY TREE & BUSINESS/PROFESSION OF YOUR SON/DAUGHTERS. ANS. BROTHER: 1. SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL 2. SHRI RAM KISHAN MITTAL SISTER 3. SMT. BIMLA DEVI (HOUSE-WIFE) WHEREABOUTS OF MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS ARE NOT KNOW N TO ME. MY FAMILY-FREE IS AS UNDER:- 1. SMT. SAROJ MITTAL,MBBS PRACTISING WITH ME (WIFE) 2. SH.JATINDER MITTAL (MARRIED) STUDYING MCH AT DELHI ( 28 YEARS) 3. MS. NIDHI MITTAL ( 25 YEARS) MBA PREPARING FOR PSU COMPETITION. Q.3. PLEASE GIVEN DETAILS OF UNSECURED LOANS AS ON 31.03.2009 WITH SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL, SH.BHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF AN D SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, INDL. IN YOUR NAME AND IN T HE NAME OF YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS. ANS. I AS WELL AS MY FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE NOT ANY TY PE OF MONETARY DEALING WITH THE ABOVE SAID THREE PERSONS. ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 10 Q.4 AS PER RECORDS OF SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, H UF, SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, INDL. AND SMT. SUSHILA MITT AL FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.3.2007 AND 31.3.2008 AVAILABLE IN MY OFFI CE, THERE ARE UNSECURED LOANS IN YOUR NAME AND IN THE NAMES OF YO UR FAMILY MEMBERS. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SAY ABOUT THIS? ANS. I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE & NO RELATIVELY WITH THE A BOVE SAID LOANS IN HIS BOOKS AND SAME APPLIES TO MY CHILDREN. 3.1. FROM THE DEPOSITION MADE BY ONE OF THE CREDITO RS SH. O.P. MITTAL, IT IS HELD THAT TRANSFERRING OF UNSECURED L OANS TO HIS CAPITAL ACCOUNT AT RS.53,19,139/- DURING THE YEAR UNDER CON SIDERATION, REFLECTED IN THE NAMES OF SH. O.P.MITTAL, HIS FAMIL Y MEMBERS AND IN THE NAMES OF SOME OTHER RELATIVES, IS, IN ACTUAL UN EXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE IN HIS STATEMENT, SH. O.P.MITT AL HAS CLEARLY STATED THAT HE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE NOT ANY TYPE OF MONETARY DEALINGS WITH THE ASSESSEE BUT THE ASSESSEE SHOWING THEM AS CREDITORS AS ON 31.03.2007 AND 31.03.2008 UNDER THE HEAD UNSE CURED LOANS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE UTILIZE THE AMOUNT OF UNSEC URED LOANS, IN THE NAMES OF SH. O.P.MITTAL, HIS FAMILY MEMBERS AND IN THE NAMES OF OTHERS, AS SUITS AND CONVENIENT TO HIM. 3.2. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE DURING THE YEA R UNDER CONSIDERATION, IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS IN THE CASES OF HIS SISTER CONCERNS SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL AND SH. HARBHAG WAN DASS MITTAL, INDL., THE UNSECURED LOANS STATED TO BE TRANSFERRED TO CAPITAL ACCOUNTS, RELATE TO THE FAMILY OF SH. O.P. MITTAL AND SH. R.K .MITTAL. 3.3. A PERUSAL OF THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT FURNISHED, TH ERE ARE HUGE WITHDRAWALS IN CASH OF RS.8,00,000/-, RS.15,00,000/ -, RS.5,00,000/-, RS.8,00,000/-, RS.7,00,000/-, RS.7,00,000/- AND RS. 1,70,000/- ON 10.4.2008, 20.6.2008, 15.10.2008, 05.11.2008, 25.11 .2008, 02.12.2008 AND 25.02.2009 RESPECTIVELY BUT THE ASSE SSEE FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR UTILIZATION TH ESE WITHDRAWALS. THE ASSESSEE STATED THESE WITHDRAWALS HAVE BEEN TR ANSFERRED TO PERSONAL ACCOUNT BUT ALSO NO PERSONAL BOOKS OF ACCO UNT WERE PRODUCED INSPITE OF SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES AFFORD ED TO THE ASSESSEE. ON ONE HAND TRANSFERRING THE UNSECURED LOANS TO THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND ON THE OTHER HAND MAKING SUCH HUGE WITHDRAWALS AND KEEPING IN ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 11 VIEW THE DEPOSITION MADE BY SH.O.P.MITTAL CREDITOR THAT HE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE NOT ANY TYPE OF MONETARY DEALI NG WITH THE ASSESSEE ( I.E. RELINQUISHMENT OF RIGHTS OF CLAIM) SHOWS THAT IT WAS ASSESSEES OWN INCOME AND HE IS UTILIZING THE SAME AS AND WHEN REQUIRED. 3.4. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FOREGOING FACTS, THE AMOUN T OF RS.53,19,139/- IS HELD AS INCOME OF ASSESSEE FROM T HE SOURCES NOT DISCLOSED AND ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES U/S 56(2)(VI) OF THE ACT. I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF HIS INCOME/FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF HIS INCOME AND PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, HAVE BEEN INITIATED SEPARATELY. 3.5. THE ASSESSEE IS MAINTAINING A SAVING BANK ACCO UNT NO.111121 WITH OBC, BUDHLADA. A PERUSAL OF THE CERTIFIED COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE, OBTAINED U/S 133(6) OF THE ACT SHO WS THAT THERE IS DEPOSIT AND WITHDRAWALS OF RS.2,30,000/-, RS.821,50 0/- AND RS.1,85,000/- ON THE SAME DATES I.E. 2.4.2008, 19, 04,2008, AND 04.08.2008 RESPECTIVELY.THE SOURCES OF THESE DEPOSI TS ALSO REMAINED UNEXPLAINED IN THE ABSENCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT/CORR OBORATING EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, THIS AMOUNT OF RS.12,36,000/- IS ADDED BACK AS INCOME UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69 OF THE ACT. I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF HIS INCOME AND PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, HAVE BEEN INITIATED SEPARATELY. 11. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE RAISED AS M ANY AS 12 GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND FILED THE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVI DENCE UNDER RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES, 1962. THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED ALL THE LEGAL GROUNDS NO. 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 & 11 BEFORE HIM FOR THE REASONS MENTION ED IN HIS ORDER. ON MERIT, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.53,19,139 /- AFTER TAKING THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO AND ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVI DENCE AND ALSO DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.12,36,000/- VIDE PAGE 7 TO 9 OF HIS ORDER. ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 12 12. THE LD. DR ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT CO- OPERATIVE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE PRODUCED DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, SINCE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNIT IES WERE OFFERED TO THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY WITH THE STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUE D. THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT HAVE ANY REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE ADMISSION OF ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND, THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS N OT JUSTIFIED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 13. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. P.N.ARORA , ADVOCATE, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AO AND THE LD. CIT(A) AND FURTHER RELIED UPON THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITIONS OF RS.53,19,139/- AND RS.12,36,000/-. 14. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHICH FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE IS REPRODUCED HER EINBELOW: THAT AS PER ASSESSEE, HE HAS PERMANENTLY SHIFTED T O PANCHKULA, THEREFROM RETURN FOR THE YEAR UNDER FERENCE HAS BEE N FILED UNDER HIS PANCHKULA ADDRESS. ACCORDINGLY, IN RESPONSE TO NOTI CE ISSUED BY THE AO MADE A REQUEST VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 12.09.2011 AND 03.10.2011 FOR TRANSFER OF HIS CASES TO PANCHKULA. FURTHER THE MAIN HEAD OF THE FAMILY, SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL WAS NOT FEELING W ELL REMAINED ADMITTED IN MEDANTA HOSPITAL IN THE MONTH OF OCTOB ER DUE TO LEVER INFECTION AND HEART PROBLEM, PACE MAKER WAS PLACED AND WAS DISCHARGED ON 21.10.2011 AND ADVISED COMPLETE REST AND AVOID DUST ETC. ON THIS GROUND THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 03.1 1.2011 AND AGAIN ON 09.11.2011 AND FURHER ON 23.11.2011 . ON 23.11.2 011 THE ASSESSEE ENGAGED COUNSEL SH. ASHWANI JUNEJA AND FILED MAXIMU M REPLY EXCEPT ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 13 CERTAIN PAPERS AS REQUIRED TILL 19.12.2011. ON 19. 12.2011 THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR 21.12.2011 FOR FILING THE BALANCE INFORMATION THOUGH THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED FOR SOME MORE ONE OR TO DAYS TIME AS IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR FILING THE INFORMATION AFTER TRAVELING TO CHANDIGARH FROM MANSA AND BACK CHANDIGARH TO MANSA WITHIN ONE DAY AFTER PREPARING THE INFORMATION. THE INFORMATI ON HAS BEEN FILED ON 26.12.201.1 THE RELEVANT INFORMATION HAS ALSO BE EN FILED BEFORE THE LD. JCIT, R-1, BATHINDA IN RESPONSE TO PENALT. REPL Y FILED BEFORE THE LD. JCIT IS AS UNDER: WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR PENALTY NOTICE DATED 24.07. 2012 IN THE ABOVE NOTED CASE IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT IN THI S CASE MY FIRM NAMELY ARJAN DASS PYARE LAL WHICH I AM PROPRIETOR HAS TO PAY CERTAIN LIABILITIES ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN AND INTEREST OUTSTAN DING IN THE NAME OF SG. O.P.MITTAL AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. ON 06.05.200 8 THERE STARTED A DISPUTED BETWEEN MY FAMILY AND THE FAMILY OF SH.O.P . MITTAL AGAINST WHICH A POLICE REPORT HAS BEEN MADE BY SH.O.P.MITTA L WHICH WAS CONVERTED TO FIR ON 08.03.2009. DURING THE PERIOD N EGOTIATION WAS ALSO GOING ON BUT NOT MATURED TILL DATE. ORIGINALLY THE AMOUNTS PAYABLE TO SH.O.P. MITTAL AND HAS FAMILY WAS OUTSTA NDING IN MY FIRM IN WHICH BUSINESS IS BEING DONE BY ME BUT IT WAS TR ANSFERRED TO MY PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET AND SHOWN AS LIABILITIES BY PASSING A GENERAL ENTRY SO THAT IF THE DISPUTE IS NOT SETTLED OR NEGO TIATION ARE NOT MATURED IT WILL NOT EFFECT MY BUSINESS. OTHERWISE T HERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT NO RE-PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO SH. O.P.MITTAL OR HIS FAMILY MEMBERS AND THE AMOUNT IS STILL OUTSTANDING AS PER STATEMENT RECORDED BY THE AO ON 23.10.09 IN WHICH SH.O.P.MITT AL HAS DULY ADMITTED THAT NO PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO HIM IN RE SPECT OF LOAN OUTSTANDING AS ON 31.03.2007 AND 31.03.2008 IN HIS NAME OR HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. ON THE BASIS OF THIS STATEMENT NO A DVERSE VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN AT THE TIME OF FINALIZING THE ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA 2007-08 ON ACCOUNT OF OUTSTANDIN G LIABILITY OF SH.O.P.MITTAL OR HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, IT IS, THEREFORE, R EQUESTED THAT THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS STARTED IN THIS CASE MAY KINDLY BE DROPPED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE INFORMATION AS REQUIRED AND ALSO KEEPING IN VIEW THE SERIOUS ILLNESS OF THE HEAD OF THE ASSESSEE ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 14 APPELLANT FAMILY, IT IS REQUESTED HAT THE ADDITIONA L INFORMATION AS FILED ON 26.12.2011 MAY KINDLY BE ADMITTED BEFORE DISPOSI NG OF THE CASE AS PER GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. 15. THE DOCUMENTS FILED ON 26.12.2011 IN THE FORM O F ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ARE AS UNDER: 1. BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT & LOSS, CAPITAL A/C OF M/S . HINDUSTAN FINANCE CORPN. 2. PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT LOSS AND CAPITAL A/C 3. PROOF OF INVESTMENT LIC PPF 4. PROOF OF PPF WITHDRAWAL 5. COPY OF ACCOUNT UNSECURED LOAN AND PROOF OF NEW ADDITION 6. COPY OF A/C LOANS & ADVANCES. 7. COPY OF BANK A/C SBOP-C/A OBC-CD, OBC-S/A, PNB C/A 8. DETAIL OF INTEREST 9. DETAIL OF SALARY 10. REPLY OF YOUR LETTER DT. 3.11.2011. 16. THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ADMISSION O F ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ALONGWITH THE ABOVE SAID DOCUMENTS WERE FORWARDED TO THE AO FOR COMMENTS, WHO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PROVIDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUBMITTING THE DOCUMENTS BUT SAME WERE NOT FURNISHED AND THE AO FINALIZED THE ASSESSMENT ON 23.12.2011 WHER EAS, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE SAID DOCUMENTS ONLY ON 26.12.2011 AFT ER ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE COMPLETED AND THEREFORE, THE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT STATED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BE NOT ADMITTED . 17. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER EXAMINING THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE REPORT OF THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO T GIVEN ANY COMMENTS ON ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 15 THE REASONABLE CAUSE MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSEE IN H IS APPLICATION I.E. FOR THE PROLONGED ILLNESS. IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT( A) THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE STARTED THOUGH IN THE MONTH OF SE PT., 2010 AND THEREAFTER, THE PROCEEDINGS WERE NOT TAKEN UP, WHICH, IN FACT, WERE TAKEN UP AFTER A GAP OF ONE YEAR I.E. ON 29.08.2011. THE ASSESSEE MADE A REQUEST TO TRANSFER HIS CASE TO PANCHKULA BECAUSE HIS JURISDICTION LIES AT PANCHKULA, WHICH WAS REJECTED AND CASE WAS FIXED FOR 05.10.2011 AND THER EAFTER ON 17.10.2011, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT ON MEDICAL GROUNDS OF S H.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, WHO WAS ADMITTED IN THE MEDNTA HOSPITAL, GU RGAON IN EMERGENCY ON 10.10.2011 ON ACCOUNT OF CONGESTION IN THE HEART. THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 03.11.2011 AND THEREAFTER ON 9.11.2011. THE ASSE SSEE WAS ADVISED COMPLETE BED REST AND THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED ON VA RIOUS DATES AND THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS AND FILED MAXIMUM INFORMATION, AS REQUIRED BY THE AO AND ON 21.12.2011, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AND REQUIRED TIME FOR 2-3 DAYS, WHICH IN FACT, WAS NOT GIVEN BY THE AO AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 23.12.2011. BUT THE ASS ESSEE STILL FILED THE INFORMATION ON 26.12.2011 BEFORE THE AO, WHICH IN F ACT, ARE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IN THE FACTS AND C IRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENT ED BY REASONABLE AND ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 16 SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE INFORMATION DUE TO PROLONGED ILLNESS AND DUE TO THE REASONS HE WAS RESIDING AT CHANDIGARH A ND HE HAS TO TRAVEL FROM CHANDIGARH TO MANSA TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS AND I T WAS A FIT CASE FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, GROUND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE AGAINST ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IS REJ ECTED AND THE ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE LD. DR CANNOT HELP THE REVENUE. 18. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS.53,19,139/- ON AC COUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS IN THE NAME OF SH.O.P.MITTAL, SH.R.K.MITTAL A ND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS, IT IS ON RECORD BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) THAT ALL THESE LOANS ARE OUTSTANDING SINCE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. AS REGAR DS THE STATEMENT OF SH.O.P.MITTAL, WHICH WAS RECORDED ON 23.10.2009, AS REFERRED TO BY THE AO, NO ADVERSE VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE AO WHILE COMP LETING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE AO VIDE PARA 2. 5 OF THE ORDER THAT BY TRANSFERRING UNSECURED LOANS TO THE PERSONAL BOOKS, IT CAN BE INFERRED EITHER THE UNSECURED LOANS HAVE BEEN REPAID OTHER THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DEMAND DRAFT IN CONTRAVENTION TO THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 269T OF THE ACT OR IT WAS ASSESSEES OWN INCO ME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. FOR VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 26 9T OF THE ACT, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 17 SUBMITTED THE REPLY, WHICH FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIE NCE IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR PENALTY NOTICE DATED 24.07.2 012 IN THE ABOVE NOTED CASE IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT IN THIS CASE MY FIRM NAMELY ARJAN DASS PYARE LAL OF WHICH I AM PROPRIETO R HAS TO PAY CERTAIN LIABILITIES ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN AND INTEREST OUTSTANDING IN THE NAME OF SH.O.P.MITTAL AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. ON 06 .05.2008 THERE STARTED A DISPUTED BETWEEN MY FAMILY AND THE FAMILY OF SH.O.P.MITTAL AGAINST WHICH A POLICE REPORT HAS BEEN MADE BY SH.O .P.MITTAL WHICH WAS CONVERTED TO FIR ON 9.3.2009. DURING THIS PERI OD NEGOTIATION WAS ALSO GOING ON BUT NOT MATURED TILL DATE. ORIGIN ALLY THE AMOUNTS PAYABLE TO SH.O.P. MITTAL AND HAS FAMILY WAS OUTSTA NDING IN MY FIRM IN WHICH BUSINESS IS BEING DONE BY ME BUT IT WAS TR ANSFERRED TO MY PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET AND SHOWN AS LIABILITIES BY PASSING A GENERAL ENTRY SO THAT IF THE DISPUTE IS NOT SETTLED OR NEGO TIATION ARE NOT MATURED IT WILL NOT EFFECT MY BUSINESS. OTHERWISE T HERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT NO RE-PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO SH. O.P.MITTAL OR HIS FAMILY MEMBERS AND THE AMOUNT IS STILL OUTSTANDING AS PER STATEMENT RECORDED BY THE AO ON 23.10.09 IN WHICH SH.O.P.MITT AL HAS DULY ADMITTED THAT NO PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO HIM IN RE SPECT OF LOAN OUTSTANDING AS ON 31.03.2007 AND 31.03.2008 IN HIS NAME OR HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. ON THE BASIS OF THIS STATEMENT NO A DVERSE VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN AT THE TIME OF FINALIZING THE ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA 2007-08 ON ACCOUNT OF OUTSTANDIN G LIABILITY OF SH.O.P.MITTAL OR HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. 19. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT AFTER CONSIDERI NG THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE, THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS SO INITIATED WERE DROPPED BY THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IN SHORT. JCIT). THER EFORE, THE FINDINGS OF THE AO IN THE PARA 2.5 REFERRED TO HEREINABOVE WITH REGARD TO REPAYMENT OTHER THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES OR ACCOUNT P AYEE BANK DRAFT BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND THERE IS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD OF R EPAYMENT OF SUCH LOANS ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 18 BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE AO. ALSO, THE FINDINGS OF THE AO THAT IT IS ASSESSEES OWN INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES DUR ING THE YEAR HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED BY BRINGING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD . MOREOVER, THE SAID AMOUNT CANNOT BE TREATED AS INCOME OF THE IMPUGNED YEAR SINCE ALL THE LOANS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN EARLIER YEARS WHICH IS A MATTER OF RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THEREFORE, EARLIE R YEARS LOANS, WHICH ARE OUTSTANDING SINCE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 CANNOT BE GIVEN A COLOUR OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE IMPUGNED YEAR. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS EXAMINED ALL THE EVIDENCES PLACED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ON RECORD THAT ALL THE UNSECURED LOANS RECEIVED IN THE EARLIER YEARS WERE STILL OUTSTANDING IN THE IMPUGNED YEAR. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE EXPLA NATION BEFORE THE AO IN THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS FOR TRANSFERRING SOME OF T HE PERSONAL LOANS BEFORE THE LD. JCIT . IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WHO HAS RIGHTLY DEL ETED THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE AO. 20. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION MADE FOR DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT NO.111121 WITH OBC, BUDHLADA ON 2.4.2008, 19.4.2008 AND 4.8.2008 AMOUNTING TO RS.2,30,000/-, RS.8,21,500/- AND RS.1, 85,000/- RESPECTIVELY, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS EXAMINED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE THAT THE SAID AMOUNT HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED FROM THE CURRENT ACCOUNT TO TH E SAVING BANK AND THERE IS ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 19 NO JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.2,30,000/ -, RS.8,21,500/- AND RS.1,85,000/- TOTALING RS.12,36,000/-. IN SUCH FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WHO HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE AO. THUS, ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 21. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE I N ITA NO.432(ASR)/2013 AND C.O. NO.42(ASR)2013 OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMIS SED. 22. NOW, WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN IT A NO.430(ASR)/2014 IN THE CASE OF SMT. SUSHILA MITTAL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS C.O. BEARING NO.41(ASR)/2013 AND ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 23. AS REGARDS THE GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE, THE FACT S ARE SIMILAR AS IN THE CASE OF SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF IN ITA NO.43 2(ASR)/2013 EXCEPT THE AMOUNT OF LOANS RECEIVED WHICH IS RS.60,08,228/ - IN THE PRESENT CASE. ALL OTHER FACTS REGARDING OBSERVATION OF THE AO FOR NON -COOPERATIVE ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEES EXPLANATION FOR SHIFTIN G THE JURISDICTION AT PANCHKULA AND SUBMISSION OF PART DETAILS BEFORE TH E AO, SUBMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), REMAND R EPORT FROM THE AO AND FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) ARE SIMILAR AS IN THE CAS E OF SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF IN ITA NO.432(ASR)/2013 (SUPRA). THEREF ORE, OUR FINDINGS IN ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 20 THE CASE OF SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF IN ITA N O.432(ASR)/2013 (SUPRA) ARE IDENTICALLY APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT C ASE AND ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DE LETING THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE AO AND ACCORDINGLY ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE RE VENUE ARE DISMISSED. 24. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE I N ITA NO.430(ASR)/2013 AND C.O. NO.41(ASR)2013 OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMIS SED. 25. NOW, WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN I TA NO.431(ASR)/2014 IN THE CASE OF SH. HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL. THE FACT S IN THE PRESENT CASE ARE ARE SIMILAR AS IN THE CASE OF SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MI TTAL, HUF IN ITA NO.432(ASR)/2013 EXCEPT THE AMOUNT OF LOANS RECEIVE D WHICH IS RS.34,44,348/- AND RS.18,01,652/- IN THE PRESENT C ASE. ALL OTHER FACTS REGARDING OBSERVATION OF THE AO FOR NON-COOPERATIVE ATTITUDE OF THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEES EXPLANATION FOR SHIFTING THE JURISDI CTION AT PANCHKULA AND SUBMISSION OF PART DETAILS BEFORE THE AO, SUBMISSI ON OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO AN D FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) ARE SIMILAR AS IN THE CASE OF SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF IN ITA NO.432(ASR)/2013 (SUPRA). THEREFORE, OUR FINDIN GS IN THE CASE OF SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF IN ITA NO.432(ASR)/2 013 (SUPRA) ARE IDENTICALLY APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASE AND ACCO RDINGLY, WE FIND NO ITA NOS. 430, 431 & 432(ASR)/2013 C.O.NOS. 41 & 42(ASR)/2013 21 INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DELETING T HE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE AO AND ACCORDINGLY ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE REVENUE A RE DISMISSED. 26. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS OF THE R EVENUE IN ITA NOS. 432(ASR)2013, 430(ASR)/2013 & 431(ASR)/2013 AND C.O . NOS. 42 (ASR)/2013 & 41(ASR)/2013 OF THE ASSESSEES ARE DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21ST FEBRUARY, 2015. SD/- SD/- (A.D.JAIN) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21ST FEBRUARY, 2015 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEES:I) SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL, HUF (II ) SH.HARBHAGWAN DASS MITTAL & (III) SMT. SUSHILA MITT AL. 2. THE ITO WARD 1(4), MANSA. 3. THE CIT(A), BATHINDA. 4. THE CIT, BATHINDA. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.