DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR V. SHRI SANDEEP CHHABRA, JAIPUR

ITA 554/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3707 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BK GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAY GOYAL C A DHK
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Unexplained expenditure; Salary income; Loose papers; Document seized; Documents seized
• Section: 143(3); 133A; 132

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES B, JAIPUR JH JES'K LH 'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA - @ ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'KZ @ ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. SHRI SANDEEP CHHABRA, 4343, NATHMAL JI KA CHOWK, JOHARI BAZAR, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA -@THVKBZVKJ LA -@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAPPC 5032 M VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI B.K. GUPTA (CIT-DR) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VIJAY GOYAL (CA) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF HEARING: 14/05/2019 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/05/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01/02/2018 OF LD. CIT(A)-4, JAIPUR FOR THE A.Y. 2013-14 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153B(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER: 1 WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/- MADE ON THE BASIS OF FIGURES AS PER DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA, ONE OF THE EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSEE GROUP. 2. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PERUSED. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVES ITS INCOME FROM SALARY, HOUSE 2 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA PROPERTY, CAPITAL GAIN AND OTHER SOURCES. ASSESSEE BELONGS TO MOTISONS GROUP ON WHOSE BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL PREMISES, A SEARCH ACTION U/S 132 AND SURVEY ACTION. U/S 133A OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT ON 31.10.2012. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ACTION, CASH, JEWELLERY, VALUABLES, STOCK-IN-TRADE, DOCUMENTS, BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND/OR LOOSE PAPERS WERE FOUND AND SEIZED FROM THE PREMISES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE MOTISONS GROUP OF WHICH ONE SUCH MEMBER WAS THE ASSESSEE . A SSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 37,27,73,530/- ON 22.10.2013 FOR AY 2013-14. FINALLY, AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 26.3.2015 AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.37,96,14,000/-. 3. IN ITS ORDER, THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT A PEN DRIVE OF SHRI BANWARI LAL YOGI (ACCOUNTANT OF ASSESSEE GROUP) WAS SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE . ON EXAMINATION OF PEN DRIVE A FILE OF MS EXCEL NAMING ACCNT-19.9.11' WAS FOUND THEREIN WHICH REFLECTED THE ACCOUNTED AND UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE IN CONSTRUCTION OF MOTISONS TOWER. ON THE BASIS OF ENTRIES CONTAINED IN MS EXCEL FILE `ACCNT-19.9.11' THE ASSESSEE MADE SURRENDER OF RS.14.57 CRORES ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF MOTISONS TOWER. THIS DISCLOSURE WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF CASH PAYMENTS TO VARIOUS PERSONS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF MOTISONS TOWER AS 3 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA EVIDENCED BY THE SEIZED MATERIAL. IN THE EXCEL SHEET AT POINT NO. 1, IT HAS BEEN NOTICED THAT COMPANY AIPL (ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD.) HAS DONE SOME WORK FOR MOTISONS GLOBAL PVT. LTD. FOR WHICH PAYMENT OF RS. 5,23,81,924/- (RS. 2,55,47,110/- RECORDED AND RS. 2,68,34,114/- UNRECORDED) WAS MADE BY MOTISONS GLOBAL PVT. LTD. TO AIPL. HOWEVER, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT RESIDENCE OF SH. NEERAJ AJMERA (EMPLOYEE OF ASSESSEE GROUP WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER THE WORK OF CONSTRUCTION OF MOTISONS TOWER) AT PG. NO. 41-43 OF SEIZED ANNEXURE BS-11 THE SHAPE OF INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE AND RECONCILIATION DONE BY ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD. AND MOTISONS GLOBAL PVT. LTD. WAS FOUND AND AS PER SUCH DETAIL THE TOTAL AMOUNT IN RESPECT OF WORK DONE BY AIPL COMES TO RS. 5,92,22,392/-, OUT OF WHICH RS. 5,23,81,924/- WAS ONLY FOUND RECORDED IN EXCEL SHEET OF SH. BANWARI LAL YOGI, THEREFORE, THE A.O. STATED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 68,40,468/- WAS NOT RECORDED IN THE MS EXCEL SHEET ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 14.57 CRORE WAS SURRENDERED BY ASSESSEE THUS IN VIEW OF THE FIGURES RECORDED IN SEIZED DOCUMENTS, UNACCOUNTED PAYMENT TO AIPL WAS INCREASED BY THE A.O. TO RS. 68,40,468/- IN THE OVERALL UNDISCLOSED FIGURE OF RS. 14.57 CRORE. 4. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/- AFTER OBSERVING AS UNDER: 4 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA 6. I HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF AO AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT IN THIS REGARD. I HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT SEIZED DOCUMENT IN QUESTION (PLACED ON APB) ON THE BASIS OF WHICH ADDITIONS ARE MADE BY THE AO. IN GROUND NO 1, THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE DISPUTE OVER LEGALITY OF THE ORDER U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B (1)(B) PASSED BY THE AO CHALLENGING THAT THE ASSESSMENT IS BASED PURELY ON THE RECOMMENDATION IN APPRAISAL REPORT AND THE AO HAS NOT APPLIED HIS MIND. THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSMENT IS BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION IN APPRAISAL REPORT. THE AO HAS EXAMINED THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS AND THE AO HAS DEALT WITH THE EXPLANATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THEREFORE, THE GROUND NO 1 OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. IN GROUND NO 2, THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/- ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT TO ALUMAYER INDIA PAT LTD (AIL) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING AT SB - 110, LAL KOTHI, TONK ROA.D, JAIPUR (MOD SONS TOWER). DURING THE - COURSE OF SEARCH, THE DEPARTMENT SEIZED A PEN DRIVE OF ACCOUNTANT OF ASSESSEE SHRI BANWARI LAL YOGI FROM THE OFFICE SITUATED AT THE RESIDENCE OF ASSESSEE B-9, VIVEKANAND MARG, JAIPUR WHICH INVENTORISED AS ANNEXURE AS EX-12. THE PRINTOUT OF THE FILES IN PEN DRIVE WAS TAKEN, WHICH IS AN EXCEL SHEET SHOWING CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES AS REGARD BUILDING AT SB -110, LAL KOTHI, JAIPUR. THIS EXCEL SHEET HAS 5 COLUMNS VIZ: 1. 5. NO 2. PARTICULARS 3. AMOUNT -A 4. AMOUNT -B 5. AMOUNT -TOTAL 5 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA FURTHER, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT RESIDENCE OF SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA (EMPLOYEE OF ASSESSEE GROUP WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER THE WORK OF CONSTRUCTION OF MOTIONS TOWER) AT PAGE NO. 41-43 OF SEIZED ANNEXURE BS-11 THE SHAPE OF INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE AND RECONCILIATION DONE BY ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD AND MOTISONS GLOBAL PVT. LTD. WAS FOUND AND AS PER SUCH DETAIL THE TOTAL AMOUNT IN RESPECT OF WORK DONE BY AIPL COMES TO RS. 5,92,22,392/-, OUT OF WHICH RS. 5,23,81,924/- WAS ONLY FOUND RECORDED IN THE PRINT OUT OF THE EXCEL SHEET TAKEN FROM PEN DRIVE SEIZED VIDE ANNEXURE AS EXHIBIT- 12. THE DISPUTE IS OVER THE DIFFERENCE OF RS. 68,40,468/- WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE AO AS UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING OVER AND ABOVE TO THE SURRENDER OF RS. 14,57,28,753/- MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN RETURN. I FOUND THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE HAS RECONCILED THE FIGURES MENTIONED IN SEIZED ANNEXURE AS EXHIBIT -12 BY SUBMITTING THE RECONCILIATION CHART ALONGWITH THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE CONCERNED PARTIES. THE FIGURE MENTIONED IN THE TOTAL INVESTMENT SHOWN IN THE SEIZED DOCUMENT AND RECONCILIATION CHART SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO ARE SAME. AS REGARD FIGURES MENTIONED UNDER COLUMN 'A' AND 'B' OF THE SEIZED EXCEL SHEET, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE AO THAT THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN THE COLUMN 'A' OF THIS SHEET REPRESENTS THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE PARTIES THROUGH A/C PAYEE CHEQUE TILL THE DATE OF PREPARATION OF THIS SHEET. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN COLUMN 'B' DOES NOT REPRESENT THE PAYMENTS MADE TO PARTIES IN CASH BUT IT REPRESENTS TO EITHER PAYMENT MADE TO PARTIES IN CASH OR PAYABLE TO PARTIES AS ON THE DATE OF PREPARATION OF SHEET, PART PAYMENT OF WHICH WAS MADE THROUGH A/C PAYEE CHEQUE. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THIS PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE BY MENTIONING THAT NO 6 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA DETAIL HAS BEEN SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AS WELL AS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS SHOWING THAT OUT OF TOTAL AMOUNT WRITTEN IN COLUMN B HOW MUCH AMOUNT WAS RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND HOW MUCH PAYMENT WAS MADE IN CASH WHICH WAS NOT RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE AO MENTIONED THAT NO RECONCILIATION AS REGARD TO FIGURE WRITTEN IN COLUMN B HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. I FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A SHEET TO THE LD. AO (COPY AT PB PAGE 88 TO 90) ALONG WITH REPLY DATED 09.03.2015 (COPY AT PB PAGE 78 TO 87) WHEREIN THE RECONCILIATION OF TOTAL AMOUNT RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS AGAINST AMOUNTS MENTIONED IN THE EXCEL SHEET WAS WORKED OUT AND UNRECORDED PAYMENTS OF RS. 11,31,37,408/- WAS WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF EXCEL SHEET AND OTHER DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCES FOUND AS A RESULT OF SEARCH AND THE LD. AO HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY DEFECTS IN THIS SHEET. THE ASSESSEE HAS WORKED OUT THE TOTAL PAYMENTS BY CHEQUES/BANKING CHANNEL AT RS. 13,50,29,131/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ALL THE PARTIES COPY FILED AT PB PAGE 91-130 WHEREIN PAYMENTS BY CHEQUE ARE CLEARLY MENTIONED AND THE SAME MAY BE VERIFIED FROM THE BANK STATEMENTS AVAILABLE BEFORE THE AO. CONSIDERING THE ENTRIES IN THE SEIZED EXCEL SHEET, IF THE PAYMENTS BY CHEQUES ARE DEDUCTED FROM THE TOTAL INVESTMENT IN BUILDING, THEN THE UNACCOUNTED PAYMENT COMES TO RS.11,31,37,408/- AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS SURRENDERED THE INCOME OF RS. 14,57,28,753/- FOR THE UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING IN THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MEANING THEREBY THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED EXCESS INCOME OF RS. 3,25,91,345/- IN THE RETURN FILED BY HIM. 7 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA AS REGARD STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE IN SEARCH, I HAVE PERUSED THE STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE RECORDED BY THE SEARCH PARTY. IN ANSWER OF QUESTION NO 7 OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED ON 08/11/2012 THE ASSESSEE HAS SURRENDERED RS.14,57,28,538/- ON A/C OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING AT SB-110, LAL KOTHI, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR ON THE BASIS OF FIGURES NOTED IN COLUMN 13 OF EXCEL SHEET FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH'. HOWEVER, IN THE SAME QUESTION THE ASSESSEE HAS CLARIFIED THAT AFTER RECONCILIATION OF FIGURE WRITTEN IN THE EXCEL SHEET WITH THE HELP OF HIS ACCOUNTANT SHRI BANWARI LAL YOGI WHO PREPARED THIS SHEET, THE SURRENDERED AMOUNT MAY BE INCREASE OR DECREASE FROM RS. 14,57,28,583/-. THE RELEVANT TEXT OF THE STATEMENT IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER FOR READY REFERENCE: IZU & 7 VKIDS FUOKL LFKKU CH&9 FOOSDKUUN EKXZ FLFKR DK;KZY; IJ RYKKH DH DK;ZOKGH DS NKSJKU ,D PEN DRIVE IZKIR ,OA TCR DH XBZ ,OA FTLS ANNEX AS EX.12 DS :IK ESA LWPHC) FD;K X;K GSA BL PEN DRIVE ESA FLFKR FILES DK PRINT OUT FY;K X;KA BLESA ,D PRINT OUT IJ SB-110 FY[KK GQVK GSA ,OA BLESA FY[KS X, [KPZ SB-110 IJ FLFKR IYKKWV IJ FD, X, FUEKZ.K DK;Z LS LECFU/KR [KPKZS LS LECFU/KR GSA BL CKJS ESA VKI D;K DGUK PKGRS GS\ MKJ %& EGKSN; ESJS FUOKL LFKKU FLFKR DK;KZY; LS IKBZ ,OA TCR DH XBZ PEN DRIVE ESJS ACCOUNTANT JH CUOKJH YKY ;KSXH DH GS ,OA BLES TKS IZFOF'V;KA GS ;S MLDS }KJK GH DH XBZ GS ,OA BLDH IW.KZ TKUDKJH EQ>S UGHA GSA ESJK ACCOUNTANT JH CUOKJH YKY ;KSXH LS VHKH ESJK LEIDZ UGHA GKS IK;K GS BL DKJ.K U RKS EQ>S BL PEN DRIVE DS CKJS ESA IWJH TKUDKJH RFKK BLDS PRINT OUT DS CKJS ESA] ESA IW.KZ TKUDKJH UGHA YS IK;K GW ,OA U GH BLESA FN, FIGURES DK RECONCILIATION GH DJ IK;K GWA FDURKQ BU PRINT OUT DKS NS[KUS LS YX JGK GS FD ;S IZFOF'V;KA IYKWV UA SB-110 , VKSAD FLFKR MOTISONS TOWER IJ CUS GEKJS 'KKS:E ,OA DK;KZY; DS FUEKZ.K LECFU/KR [KPKSZ LS LECFU/KR IZRHR YSRS GSA ;G GEKJK FUEKZ.K DK VUQEKFUR FGLKC GKS LDRK GSA BU I`'BKS IJ 4 EQ[; DKWYE GS FTLESA [KPZ DK HEAD DKWYE A DKWYE B ,OA TOTAL DK DKWYE GSA BLESA DKWYE 8 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA A DK TOTAL :IK;S 9,48,17,685/- ,OA DKWYE B DK TOTAL :IK;S 14,57,28,583/- NTZ GSA ;GKA ESA CRKUK PKGWAXK FD BLESA LS VF/KDKAK [KPZ GEKJH DEIUH ESA MOTISONS GLOBAL PVT. LTD. DS [KKRS LS PSD DS EK/;E LS FD, GQ, GS FDURKQ DQN [KPZ ESJH V?KKSF'KR O;FDRXR VK; LS HKH FD;K X;K GS] FTLDK ESJH YS[KK&IQLRKDKS ES BUNZKT UGHA GSA ESAUS IWOZ DS C;KUKS ESA FNUKAD 05-11-2017 DKS BL FUEKZ.K IS~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}KJK IJ LEFIZR DH XBZ :IK;S 14,57,28,583/- DH V?KKSF'KR JKFK ACCOUNTS LS RECONCILIATION DS CKN DE ;K T;KNK GKS LDRH GSA THEREFORE, FROM THE STATEMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE SURRENDER WAS TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO RECONCILIATION. THE STATEMENT SHOULD BE READ AS WHOLE. THEREFORE, IN FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/- IS COVERED BY THIS EXCESS SURRENDER OF RS. 3,25,91,345/- IN THE RETURN. THEREFORE, FURTHER ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/-OVER AND ABOVE TO RS.14,57,28,753/- IS NOT JUSTIFIABLE AND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/-. 9 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 5. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE REVENUE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 6. IT WAS VEHEMENTLY ARGUED BY THE LD CIT-DR SHRI B.K. GUPTA THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT RESIDENCE OF SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA (EMPLOYEE OF ASSESSEE GROUP WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER THE WORK OF CONSTRUCTION OF MOTISONS TOWER) AT PAGE NO. 41-43 OF SEIZED ANNEXURE BS-11 THE SHAPE OF INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE AND RECONCILIATION DONE BY ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD. AND MOTISONS GLOBAL PVT. LTD. WAS FOUND AND AS PER SUCH DETAIL THE TOTAL AMOUNT IN RESPECT OF WORK DONE BY AIPL COMES TO 5,92,22,392/, OUT OF WHICH RS. 5,23,81,924/- WAS ONLY FOUND RECORDED IN EXCEL SHEET OF SHRI BANWARI LAL YOGI, THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.68,40,468/- WAS NOT RECORDED IN THE MS EXCEL SHEET ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 14.57 CRORE WAS SURRENDERED BY ASSESSEE THUS IN VIEW OF THE FIGURES RECORDED IN SEIZED DOCUMENTS, UNACCOUNTED PAYMENT TO AIPL WAS CORRECTLY INCREASED BY THE A.O. TO RS. 68,40,468/- IN THE OVERALL UNDISCLOSED FIGURE OF RS. 14.57 CRORE. 7. THE LD CIT-DR HAS FURTHER ARGUED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND AFTER POST SEARCH IN HIS STATEMENTS THE 10 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA ASSESSEE ADMITTED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 14,57,28,753/- ON A/C OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF BLINDING AT SB-110, LAL KOTHI, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR ON THE BASIS OF FIGURES NOTED IN COLUMN B OF EXCEL SHEET FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. SO FAR AS CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT WRITTEN IN COLUMN 'B' DOES NOT REPRESENTS THE PAYMENTS MADE TO PARTIES IN CASH BUT ITS REPRESENTS TO EITHER PAYMENT MADE TO PARTIES IN CASH OR PAYABLE TO PARTIES AS ON THE DATE OF PREPARATION OF SHEET, PART PAYMENT OF WHICH WAS MADE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE, IS NOT ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE NO DETAIL HAS BEEN SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AS WELL AS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THAT OUT OF TOTAL AMOUNT WRITTEN IN COLUMN B HOW MUCH AMOUNT WAS RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND HOW MUCH PAYMENT WAS MADE IN CASH WHICH WAS NOT RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. NO RECONCILIATION AS REGARD TO FIGURE WRITTEN IN COLUMN B HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. LD. CIT-DR FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE FIGURE LISTED BY ASSESSEE IN COLUMN 'RECORDED IN BOOKS UPTO THE DATE OF SEARCH' ARE THE FIGURE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH WHILE THE EXCEL SHEET MAY BELONG TO A DATE PREVIOUS TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. HENCE, COMPARISON WITH THE FIGURES MENTIONED IN 11 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA THE COLUMN 'B' IS NOT REASONABLE. ALL THE PAYMENTS LISTED IN COLUMN 'B' ARE UNACCOUNTED PAYMENTS. 8. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED BY THE LD CIT-DR THAT EXCESS PAYMENT OF RS. 68,40,468/- MADE TO M/S ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD (AIPL) WAS WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF PAGE NO. 41-43 OF ANNEXURE BS-11 SEIZED FROM RESIDENCE OF SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA INCLUDES THE POSTDATED CHEQUES IS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE AND REJECTED BECAUSE IN THIS REGARD NO EVIDENCE WAS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS, AMOUNT OF RS. 68,40,468/- WAS CORRECTLY ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVITED BY THE LD CIT-DR TO THE ANNEXURE BS-11 SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA, COPY OF STATEMENT RECORDED ON 05/11/2012 AND 08/11/2012 IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION THAT THE EXCESS PAYMENT OF RS. 68,40,468/- WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO M/S ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD. FOR WHICH NO EVIDENCE WAS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SAME, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS INCORRECTLY DELETED THE ADDITION SO ENHANCED BY THE A.O. 10. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED DETAILED RECONCILIATION CHART (COPY AT PB PAGE 12 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA 88 TO 90) RECONCILING THE FIGURES MENTIONED IN SEIZED PAPER PAGE NO 127-131 OF ANNEXURE AS 1 SEIZED FROM B-9 VIVEKANAND MARG, C-SCHEME, JAIPUR (PB PG 43-47). IN THE RECONCILIATION CHART SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO, THE TOTAL AMOUNT AGAINST THE CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES IS SAME. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO UNDER-STATEMENT IN THE TOTAL INVESTMENT SHOWN IN THE SEIZED DOCUMENT AND RECONCILIATION CHART SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE FIGURES MENTIONED UNDER COLUMN 'A' AND 'B' OF THE SEIZED EXCEL SHEET, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED TO THE AO THAT THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN THE COLUMN 'A' OF THIS SHEET REPRESENTS THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE PARTIES THROUGH A/C PAYEE CHEQUE TILL THE DATE OF PREPARATION OF THIS SHEET. AS REGARD COLUMN 'B' THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN COLUMN 'B' REPRESENTS TO EITHER PAYMENT MADE TO PARTIES IN CASH OR PAYABLE (OUTSTANDING) TO PARTIES AS ON THE DATE OF PREPARATION OF SHEET. AFTERWARDS, OUT OF AMOUNT MENTIONED IN COLUMN 'B', PART PAYMENT WAS MADE THROUGH A/C PAYEE CHEQUE. 11. AS PER THE LD AR, I N SUPPORT OF THE AMOUNT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ALL THE PARTIES AND COPY OF BANK STATEMENT. AS PER THIS RECONCILIATION CHART, THE UNACCOUNTED PAYMENTS COME TO RS. 11,31,37,408/- AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE DECLARED THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 14,57,28,583/- IN THE RETURN FILED IN ORDER TO HONOR ADMISSION MADE IN SEARCH STATEMENT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE MADE AN EXCESS SURRENDER OF RS. 3,25,91,175/-. 13 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA HE FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE DETAILS SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AS WELL AS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS SHOWING THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT RETURN IN COLUMN B HOW MUCH AMOUNT WAS RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND HOW MUCH PAYMENT WAS MADE IN CASH WHICH WAS NOT RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE AO MENTIONED THAT NO RECONCILIATION AS REGARD TO FIGURE WRITTEN IN COLUMN B HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS FINDING IS PATENTLY WRONG AND PERVERSE. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A SHEET TO THE AO (COPY AT PB PAGE 88 TO 90) ALONG WITH REPLY DATED 09.03.2015 (COPY AT PB PAGE 78 TO 87) WHEREIN THE RECONCILIATION OF TOTAL AMOUNT RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS AGAINST AMOUNTS MENTIONED IN THE EXCEL SHEET WAS WORKED OUT AND UNRECORDED PAYMENTS OF RS. 11,31,37,408/- WAS WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF EXCEL SHEET AND OTHER DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCES FOUND AS A RESULT OF SEARCH AND THE AO HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY DEFECTS IN THIS WORKING. 12. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE RECORDED DURING COURSE OF SEARCH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT ON 05/11/2012 AND 08/11/2012. WE HAVE ALSO VERIFIED THE COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF ALL THE PARTIES AND RECONCILIATION STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED AS APPEARING IN COLUMN B OF SEIZED EXCEL SHEET. 14 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA FROM THE RECORD WE FOUND THAT T HE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CARRIED OUT SEARCH OPERATIONS OVER THE RESIDENCE & BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS HIS EMPLOYEES. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH THE DEPARTMENT SEIZED A PEN DRIVE FROM OFFICE AT HIS RESIDENCE WHICH BELONGS TO THE ACCOUNTANT OF ASSESSEE SHRI BANWARI LAL YOGI. IN THE PEN DRIVE AN EXCEL SHEET WAS FOUND, WHICH WAS CONSISTING THE DETAIL OF EXPENSES INCURRED ON CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING AT SB-110, MOTISONS TOWER, LAL KOTHI, JAIPUR. THE PRINT OUT OF SUCH EXCEL SHEET IS IN SEIZURE AT PAGE NO. 127 TO 131 OF ANNEXURE AS-1 SEIZED FROM B-9, VIVEKANAND MARG, C-SCHEME, JAIPUR. DURING THE SEARCH, THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO RECORDED STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE ON 05/11/2012 AND 08/11/2012 U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF EXCEL SHEET. WE FOUND THAT IN BOTH THE STATEMENTS THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED TO SEARCH PARTY THAT THE CONTENTS OF THE EXCEL SHEET ARE NOT IN HIS KNOWLEDGE AND THE SAME WAS PREPARED BY HIS ACCOUNTANT, THEREFORE THE PROPER EXPLANATION AND RECONCILIATION OF THE SHEET COULD BE SUBMITTED AFTER SEEING THE SEIZED RECORDS AND DISCUSSION THE MATTER WITH HIS ACCOUNTANT. IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED ON 05.11.2012 THE ASSESSEE SURRENDERED ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS. 6,00,00,000/- ON AD-HOC BASIS WITHOUT VERIFYING/RECONCILING THE FIGURE OF THE EXCEL SHEET FROM REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN THE FURTHER STATEMENT RECORDED ON 08.11.2012, THE ASSESSEE SURRENDERED RS. 14,57,28,583/- ON THE BASIS OF THIS SHEET PRESUMING THAT THE FIGURE 15 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA WRITTEN IN COLUMN B OF THIS SHEET IS IN RESPECT OF UNACCOUNTED PAYMENTS. HOWEVER, THIS SURRENDER WAS CONDITIONAL SURRENDER WHICH WAS SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION/RECONCILIATION OF SHEET FROM REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND DISCUSSION WITH SHRI BANWARI LAL YOGI WHO PREPARED THIS EXCEL SHEET AND IN THE SAME QUESTION THE ASSESSEE CLARIFIED THAT THE SURRENDER AMOUNT MAY INCREASE/DECREASE AFTER DUE RECONCILIATION OF SHEET FROM BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. 13. FROM THE RECORD WE ALSO FOUND THAT AFTER THE SEARCH THE ASSESSEE, RECONCILED THE FIGURES OF THIS EXCEL SHEET FROM BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WITH THE HELP AND DISCUSSION OF THE ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUCH RECONCILIATION SHEET WITH SUPPORTING LEDGER ACCOUNTS WAS FILED TO AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ALONG WITH LETTER DATED 09.03.2015. AS PER SUCH RECONCILIATION SHEET, THE TOTAL UNACCOUNTED PAYMENTS MADE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING WAS WORKED OUT AT RS. 11,31,37,408/- AS AGAINST THE TENTATIVE SURRENDER OF ASSESSEE AT RS. 14,57,28,583/-. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HONORED THE SURRENDER MADE IN SEARCH AND DECLARED INCOME OF RS. 14,57,28,583/- TO AVOID PROLONG LITIGATION. THE AO DID NOT POINT OUT ANY DEFECTS IN THE WORKING SO SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE A.O. DID NOT AGREE WITH THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION AND MADE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/- BY PRESUMING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT TO M/S ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD. OVER AND ABOVE WHATEVER PAYMENTS FOUND RECORDED IN EXCEL 16 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA SHEET FOUND IN PEN DRIVE SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FOUND THAT APART FROM THE EXCEL SHEET SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE SEVERAL OTHER DOCUMENTS/BILLS RELATING TO CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES WERE FOUND FROM THE RESIDENCE OF SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER THE DAY TO DAY WORK OF THE CONSTRICTION. SUCH DOCUMENTS/BILLS WERE EXAMINED AND CORRELATED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND BY THE ASSESSEE WITH SUCH EXCEL SHEET. THE DEPARTMENT FOUND DISCREPANCY ONLY IN THE ACCOUNT OF AIPL. AS PER PAPER SEIZED FROM SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA, THE TOTAL PAYMENT MADE/TO BE MADE TO THIS PARTY AGAINST THE WORK WAS SHOWN AT RS. 5,92,22,392/- WHILE THE PAYMENTS IN THE NAME OF THIS PARTY IN THE EXCEL SHEET FOUND FROM THE PEN DRIVE SEIZED FROM RESIDENCE OF ASSESSEE COMES RS. 5,23,81,924/- AND DIFFERENCE OF RS. 68,40,468/- IS IN DISPUTE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE COMPLETE WORKING OF EXCEL SHEET MENTIONING THE AMOUNT RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS WELL AS IN COLUMN B OF EXCEL SHEET ALONGWITH SUPPORTING LEDGER AND THE AO DID NOT FIND ANY DEFECT IN SUCH WORKING AND COULD NOT BROUGHT TO NOTICE ANY CONTRA MATERIAL. 14. WE HAD CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE STATEMENTS OF VARIOUS PERSONS RECODED U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT AND FOUND THAT IN THE STATEMENT DATED 08.11.2012 IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 7 THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 14,57,28,753/- ON THE BASIS OF 17 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA FIGURES WRITTEN IN COLUMN B OF EXCEL SHEET. HOWEVER, IN THE SAME QUESTION HE CLARIFIED THAT AFTER RECONCILIATION OF FIGURE WRITTEN IN THE EXCEL SHEET WITH THE HELP OF HIS ACCOUNTANT SHRI BANWARI LAL YOGI WHO PREPARED THIS SHEET, THE SURRENDERED AMOUNT MAY BE INCREASE OR DECREASE FROM RS. 14,57,28,583/-. THEREFORE, FROM THE STATEMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE IT IS VERY MUCH CLEAR THAT THE SURRENDER WAS TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO RECONCILIATION. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS HONORED THE SURRENDERED AMOUNT IN THE RETURN, THEREFORE, THERE REMAINS NO DISPUTE OVER THIS ISSUE. WE ALSO FOUND THAT ALONGWITH REPLY DATED 09.03.2015, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A SHEET TO THE AO WHEREIN THE RECONCILIATION OF TOTAL AMOUNT RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS AGAINST AMOUNTS MENTIONED IN THE EXCEL SHEET WAS WORKED OUT AND UNRECORDED PAYMENTS OF RS. 13,31,37,408/- WAS WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF EXCEL SHEET AND OTHER DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCES FOUND AS A RESULT OF SEARCH WAS SUBMITTED AND THE AO DID NOT POINT OUT ANY DEFECTS IN SUCH SHEET. WE ALSO FOUND THAT THE A.O. HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEES PLEA THAT EXCESS PAYMENT OF RS. 68,40,468/- MADE TO M/S ALUMAYER INDIA PVT. LTD. WAS WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF PAGE NOS. 41 TO 43 OF ANNEXURE-BS-11 SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF SHRI NEERAJ AJMERA INCLUDES POSTDATED CHEQUES. IN THIS REGARD, WE FOUND THAT ON THE PAPER THE ADVANCE GIVEN IS ONLY MENTIONED AND IT IS NOWHERE MENTIONED THAT WHAT WAS THE DATES OF THE PAYMENTS AND WHAT WERE THE MODE OF PAYMENTS. IF IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE 18 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA PAYMENTS MENTIONED ON THIS PAPER WAS ACTUALLY MADE/REALIZED TO THIS PARTY THAN THE SAME SHOULD HAVE BEEN MENTIONED ON THE EXCEL SHEET SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 15. WE ALSO FOUND THAT AS PER STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE IT IS VERY MUCH CLEAR THAT THE SURRENDER WAS TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO RECONCILIATION. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE STATEMENT DATED 08.11.2012 IS AS UNDER: IZU & 7 VKIDS FUOKL LFKKU CH&9 FOOSDKUUN EKXZ FLFKR DK;KZY; IJ RYKKH DH DK;ZOKGH DS NKSJKU ,D PEN DRIVE IZKIR ,OA TCR DH XBZ ,OA FTLS ANNEX AS EX.12 DS :IK ESA LWPHC) FD;K X;K GSA BL PEN DRIVE ESA FLFKR FILES DK PRINT OUT FY;K X;KA BLESA ,D PRINT OUT IJ SB-110 FY[KK GQVK GSA ,OA BLESA FY[KS X, [KPZ SB-110 IJ FLFKR IYKKWV IJ FD, X, FUEKZ.K DK;Z LS LECFU/KR [KPKZS LS LECFU/KR GSA BL CKJS ESA VKI D;K DGUK PKGRS GS\ MKJ %& EGKSN; ESJS FUOKL LFKKU FLFKR DK;KZY; LS IKBZ ,OA TCR DH XBZ PEN DRIVE ESJS ACCOUNTANT JH CUOKJH YKY ;KSXH DH GS ,OA BLES TKS IZFOF'V;KA GS ;S MLDS }KJK GH DH XBZ GS ,OA BLDH IW.KZ TKUDKJH EQ>S UGHA GSA ESJK ACCOUNTANT JH CUOKJH YKY ;KSXH LS VHKH ESJK LEIDZ UGHA GKS IK;K GS BL DKJ.K U RKS EQ>S BL PEN DRIVE DS CKJS ESA IWJH TKUDKJH RFKK BLDS PRINT OUT DS CKJS ESA] ESA IW.KZ TKUDKJH UGHA YS IK;K GW ,OA U GH BLESA FN, FIGURES DK RECONCILIATION GH DJ IK;K GWA FDURKQ BU PRINT OUT DKS NS[KUS LS YX JGK GS FD ;S IZFOF'V;KA IYKWV UA SB-110 , VKSAD FLFKR MOTISONS TOWER IJ CUS GEKJS 'KKS:E ,OA DK;KZY; DS FUEKZ.K LECFU/KR [KPKSZ LS LECFU/KR IZRHR YSRS GSA ;G GEKJK FUEKZ.K DK VUQEKFUR FGLKC GKS LDRK GSA BU I`'BKS IJ 4 EQ[; DKWYE GS FTLESA [KPZ DK HEAD DKWYE A DKWYE B ,OA TOTAL DK DKWYE GSA BLESA DKWYE A DK TOTAL :IK;S 9,48,17,685/- ,OA DKWYE B DK TOTAL 19 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA :IK;S 14,57,28,583/- NTZ GSA ;GKA ESA CRKUK PKGWAXK FD BLESA LS VF/KDKAK [KPZ GEKJH DEIUH ESA MOTISONS GLOBAL PVT. LTD. DS [KKRS LS PSD DS EK/;E LS FD, GQ, GS FDURKQ DQN [KPZ ESJH V?KKSF'KR O;FDRXR VK; LS HKH FD;K X;K GS] FTLDK ESJH YS[KK&IQLRKDKS ES BUNZKT UGHA GSA ESAUS IWOZ DS C;KUKS ESA FNUKAD 05-11-2017 DKS BL FUEKZ.K IS~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}KJK IJ LEFIZR DH XBZ :IK;S 14,57,28,583/- DH V?KKSF'KR JKFK ACCOUNTS LS RECONCILIATION DS CKN DE ;K T;KNK GKS LDRH GSA THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IN HIS SEARCH STATEMENT CLEARLY STATED THAT INVESTMENT MENTIONED IN COL B OF THE SEIZED EXCEL SHEET IS SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION FROM BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND IT MAY BE MORE OR AT LESSER FIGURE. AFTER RECORDING FINDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) REACHED TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/- IS COVERED BY THE EXTRA SURRENDER SO MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME. FINDINGS SO RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ARE AS PER THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE IN THE FINDINGS SO RECORDED BY THE LD. 20 ITA NO. 554/JP/2018 DCIT VS SANDEEP CHHABRA CIT(A), THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 68,40,468/-. 16. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH MAY, 2019. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO JES'K LH 'KEKZ (VIJAY PAL RAO) (RAMESH C SHARMA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKA D@ DATED:- 16 TH MAY, 2019 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- SHRI SANDEEP CHHABRA, 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. 554/JP/2018) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR