M/s V S Kalbhor & Associates, Pune V. Asst. CIT, Circle-8, Pune

ITA 815/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 81524514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Retraction; Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 133A; 234B; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.815/PN/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) M/S. V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES LAKE PARADISE, SHANTAI RESIDENCY OPP. CRPF, PUNE MUMBAI HIGHWAY TALEGAON DABHADE, PUNE 410507 PAN: AAGFV0778C . APPELLANT VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL GANOO RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAJESH DAMOR DATE OF HEARING : 04-12-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16-12-2014 ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-V, PUNE DATED 27.02.2013 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN L AW, THE LEARNED C.I.T. [A] HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED PARKING CHARGES RECEIVED FROM TWIN B UNGALOW HOLDER OF RS.2,25,000.00 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. T HE AFORESAID ADDITION BEING ARBITRARY, PERVERSE, BASED ON SURMISES, DEVOID OF MERITS AND BEING LEGALLY UNSUSTAINABLE THE LEA RNED C.I.T. [A] OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE SAID ADDITION. 2. THE APPELLANT DENIES HIS LIABILITY TO PAY ANY INTEREST U/S 2 34 B AND 234 C OF THE I.T.ACT 1961 AND HENCE THE SAME MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 2 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE PERMISSION TO ADD, AMEND, MOD IFY, ALTER, REVISE, SUBSTITUTE, DELETE ANY OR ALL GROUNDS OF APPEAL, IF DEEMED NECESSARY AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL VIDE GROUND NO .1 IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS.2,25,000/-. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT, THE ASSESSEE WA S CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS AS PROMOTER AND BUILDER OF PROPERTIES. T HE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY. SUBSEQUENTLY, SURV EY UNDER SECTION 133A OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 01.03.2011 AND THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED UNACC OUNTED INCOME OF RS.25,75,000/- FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THE AS SESSEE IN CONSEQUENT THERETO, FURNISHED REVISED RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.03.2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.57,10,260/-. THE ASSESSEE IN T HE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.23,50,000/- IN PLACE OF RS.25,75,000/- AS ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY AGAINST ADMISSIO N OF ACCOUNTED INCOME OF RS.25,75,000/- RECEIVED IN CASH FROM TH E FLAT / ROW HOUSES / TWIN BUNGALOW HOLDERS BEING PARKING, MSEB A ND OTHER CHARGES WHY A DECLARATION WAS OF RS.23,50,000/- WAS MADE AS ADDITIONAL INCOME AS AGAINST OFFER OF RS.25,75,000/-. THE EXPLA NATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE PARKING CHARGES WERE NOT RECEIVED FROM TWIN BUNGALOW HOLDERS, ACCORDINGLY, AFTER VERIFYING THE IMPO UNDED MATERIAL, THE SAID PORTION OF RS.2,25,000/- WAS RETRACTED A ND NOT OFFERED FOR TAXATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE PARA 6 OB SERVED AS UNDER:- 6. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS CLARIFIED THAT NO INT IMATION OF RETRACTION TO THAT EXTENT WAS RECEIVED BY THE DEPAR TMENT TILL DATE. 'FURTHER, NO WORKING ON THE BASIS OF IMPOUNDED MATER IALS WAS FURNISHED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE PARKING CHARGES WER E NOT RECEIVED FROM TWIN BUNGALOW. ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 3 5. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO JUSTIFY THE RETRACTION OF THE STATEMENT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2,25,000/ -, THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.2,25,000/- WAS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF T HE ASSESSEE. 6. THE CIT(A) VIDE PARA 7 HELD AS UNDER:- 7. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE EMANATING FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS 'STATEMENT OF FA CTS' FILED ALONG WITH APPEAL MEMO. THE APPELLANT CLAIMS THAT RS.2,25,0 00/- WAS NOT SHOWN IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME AS PA RKING CHARGES ETC WAS NOT RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF TWIN BUNGLOW. THE APPELLANT ALSO CLAIMED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THIS D ECISION WAS TAKEN AFTER EXAMINATION OF DOCUMENTS IMPOUNDED DURIN G THE SURVEY ACTION, HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT COULD NOT GIVE AN Y WORKING AS EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF REVISED AMOUNT OF RS.23,50 ,000/- OFFERED IN THE REVISED RETURN. FURTHER, THE APPELLANT DID NOT FILE ANY RETRACTION LETTER IN THIS REGARD BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT'S ACTION OF REVISING THE ADDIT IONAL INCOME FROM RS.25,75,000/- TO RS.23,50,000/- IS NOT SUPPORTED BY FACTS AND PROPER EXPLANATION. IN THIS CASE AFTER ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL INCOME DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, ONUS WAS ON THE APPELLANT TO PROVE THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.2,25,000/- WAS NOT RECEIVE D IN RESPECT OF TWIN BUNGLOW ON THE BASIS OF IMPOUNDED D OCUMENTS AS WELL AS OTHER EVIDENCES, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN T HE CASE. THEREFORE, ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.2,25,000/- IS UPHELD AND CONSEQUENTLY GROUND NO.1 IS DISMISSED. 7. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ADDITION OF RS.2,25,000/-. 8. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESS EE POINTED OUT THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY ON 01.03.2011, THE STATEMENT OF SUN OF THE PARTNER WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER THE BUSINESS WA S RECORDED. FURTHER, DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, DOCUMENTS WERE FOUN D IN RESPECT OF THE PARKING CHARGES, ETC. RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 TO 2011-12, AGAINST WHICH ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.3,43,83,500/- WAS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE. OUT OF SAID A DDITIONAL INCOME, A SUM OF RS.25,75,000/- WAS DECLARED AS RELATABLE T O THE YEAR ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 4 UNDER APPEAL. THEREAFTER, A RETRACTION STATEMENT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 06.04.2011 UNDER WHICH, THE DECLARATION WAS R EVISED TO RS.2,78,83,500/- AS AGAINST INITIAL DISCLOSURE OF RS.3,43,83,500 /-. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME INCLUDING THE SAID A DDITIONAL INCOME WAS FILED. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT NO PARKING CHARGES WERE RECE IVED FROM THE ROW HOUSES AND TWIN BUNGALOW HOLDERS AND CONSEQUENTLY , THE RETRACTION WAS MADE. IT WAS ALLEGED BY THE LEARNED AUTH ORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID RETRACTIO N STATEMENT WAS DULY FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE STAMP OF 06.04.2011 AVAILABLE ON THE SAID LETTER AND HENCE, THE ASS ESSING OFFICER WAS WRONG IN STATING THAT NO RETRACTION STATEMEN T WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FO R THE ASSESSEE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FAILED TO VERIFY THE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE SEIZED AND WERE AVAILABLE ON RECORD , AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE CONSEQUENTLY RETRACTED THE ADDITION AL INCOME. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT FOR THE TRANSACTION WITH P.K. PATIL, ACTU ALLY THE AMOUNT RECEIVED WAS NOT RS.3 LAKHS BUT RS.75,000/-. 9. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVEN UE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO RECONCILE THE FIGURES AND EVEN FAILED TO FILE ANY CONFIRMATION FROM MR. PATIL TO ESTABLISH IT S CLAIM OF RECEIPT OF ONLY RS.75,000/- FROM HIM AS AGAINST RS.3 LAKH S OFFERED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. FURTHER, RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMEN TAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE. ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 5 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE BEFORE US, SURVEY UNDER S ECTION 133A OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 01.03.2011. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, CERTAIN DOCUMEN TS WERE FOUND AND STATEMENT OF SHRI AJINKYA KALBHOR, S/O PARTNER SHRI VITTHAL S KALBHOR, WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER THE BUSINESS WAS RECORDE D ON OATH. IN THE SAID STATEMENT VIDE QUESTION NO.8, HE WAS CONFRON TED WITH THE NUMEROUS FILES CONTAINING THE SALE DEEDS OF ROW HOUSES, TWIN BUNGALOWS, FLATS, ETC. SOLD BY THE FIRM FOUND IN THE OFFICE PREMIS ES. IT WAS NOTED FROM THE SAID DOCUMENTS THAT THE ACTUAL CONS IDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS ON THE HIGHER SIDE AS AGAINST THE AGREEMENT VALUE. IT WAS ADMITTED BY THE SAID PERSON T HAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ACTUAL CONSIDERATION AND AGREEMENT VALUE, WHICH IN TURN, WAS RECEIVED IN CASH, WAS NOT REFLECTED IN T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. A LIST WAS PREPARED SHOWING FLAT-WISE UNACCOUNTE D AND UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, BASED ON THE SALE DEED DOCUMENTS FOUND IN THE OFFICE PREMISES WHICH IS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE A TO THE STATEMENT AND HE WAS ASKED AS TO WHY UNACC OUNTED AND UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIVED BY HIM AMOUNTING TO RS.3,43,83,50 0/- SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED AND UNACCOUNTED IN COME IN THE RESPECTIVE YEARS AND BE TAXED ACCORDINGLY. SHRI AJINKYA KALBHOR, IN REPLY TO QUERY NO.8 SUBMITTED THAT IN MOST OF THE FILES FOU ND IN HIS OFFICE PREMISES DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY ACTION, THERE W AS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ACTUAL CONSIDERATION RECEIVED AND THE AGR EEMENT VALUE SHOWN. IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT THE ACTUAL CONSIDER ATION WAS ON THE HIGHER SIDE THAN THE CONSIDERATION SHOWN FOR AGREEME NT PURPOSE. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE ENTIRE DIFFERENCE WAS NOT RECEIVED IN CASH AND THE SAME WAS NOWHERE REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCO UNT AND SOME OF THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE BY THE CUSTOMERS FOR THE PU RPOSE OF ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 6 REGISTRATION AND STAMP DUTY WHICH WAS NOT PART OF SALE R ECEIPTS. HOWEVER, HE AGREED WITH THE LIST WHICH WAS ENCLOSED AS A NNEXURE A TO THE STATEMENT SHOWING UNACCOUNTED AND UNDISCLOSED INCO ME RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM OVER THE YEARS IN THE FORM OF CASH MAINLY ON ACCOUNT OF PARKING AND MSEB CHARGES RECEIVED FROM VARIOU S CUSTOMERS AND MADE A DECLARATION OF RS.3.43 CRORES RELAT ING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 TO 2011-12. FOR THE CAPTION ED ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. 2009-10 UNDISCLOSED AND UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF RS.25,75,000/- WAS ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY BY SHRI AJINKYA KALBHOR. IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO.10 WHEN HE WA S ASKED TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE ON HIS OWN, HE REITERATED THAT ON ACCO UNT OF RECEIPT OF CASH FROM CUSTOMERS TOWARDS CAR PARKING CHARGES, MSE B CHARGES AND OTHERS, HE VOLUNTARILY OFFERED SUM OF RS.3.43 CRORES TO TAX FOR THE YEARS AS MENTIONED IN HIS ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.8 ABOVE AND PROMISED TO PAY THE TAXES DUE THEREON ON OR BEFORE 15.03.2011. IT WAS ALSO STATED BY HIM THAT THE UNACCOUNTED CASH RECEIPTS WERE UTILIZED FOR THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM ONLY. THE BREAK-UP OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS AS UNDER:- ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDISCLOSED AND UNACCOUNTED INCOME ADMITTED DURING SURVEY (AMT IN RS.) 2009-10 25,75,000/- 2010-11 90,26,000/- 2011-12 2,27,82,500/- TOTAL 3,43,83,500/- 11. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT PAGE 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER HAS ENLISTED THE BREAK-UP OF THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.25,75,000 /- WHICH READS AS UNDER:- SR NO FLAT/ROW HOUSE/BUNGALOW HOLDER FLAT/ROW HOUSE/BUNGAL OW NO. AREA UNACCOUNTED PARKING AND MSEB AND OTHER RECEIVED IN CASH (RS.) 1 SULBHA D SHINDE A 304 1000 125000 ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 7 2 SAIRAJ MULLADH A305 1000 125000 3 RP UNIYAL A306 945 125000 4 MAHESH KULKARNI A102 945 125000 5 SHILPA A KHARADE A103 945 125000 6 REKHA S AGARWAL A104 945 125000 7 YOGESH J WAGHELA A106 945 125000 8 ARCHANA GHARE A301 945 125000 9 VIKAS ANAND B201 945 125000 10 SHAKUNTALA AGARWAL B202 945 125000 11 ROHIT KAPOOR B301 945 125000 12 GP GOSWAMI 5 1565 75000 13 SANTOSH RANE 37 1565 75000 14 CD FAKIR 9 1565 75000 15 SOUMYA PATKAR 7 1565 75000 16 KJ THOMAS 48 1565 75000 17 VINOD BHARATI 44 1565 75000 18 BALASAHEB GANJWE 36 1565 75000 19 P K PATIL 14 1470 300000 20 - A203 945 125000 21 - A204 945 125000 22 - A205 945 125000 TOTAL 25,75,000 12. THE ASSESSEE THEREAFTER FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME IN W HICH ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.23,50,000/- WAS ONLY OFFERED. THE AS SESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE INITIAL OFFER OF RS.25,75 ,000/- WAS NOT DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THOUGH THE SAME WA S ADMITTED TO BE DECLARED VIDE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY BY THE PERSON CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS AND SON OF ONE OF THE P ARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 13.12.2011 ADMITTED THAT THE DISCLOSURE WAS MADE IN RESPECT OF PARK ING AND MSEB CHARGES RECEIVED FROM FLAT HOLDERS, ROW HOUSE HOLDERS AND MSEB CHARGES RECEIVED FROM TWIN BUNGALOW HOLDERS. HOWEV ER, IT WAS CLARIFIED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT PARKING CHARGES WERE NOT RECEIVED FROM TWIN BUNGALOW HOLDERS AND AFTER VERIFYING THE IMPOUNDED MA TERIAL, THE SAID PORTION OF RS.2,25,000/- WAS RETRACTED AND NOT OFFERED FOR TAX. 13. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSES SEE BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THE RETRACTION STATEMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON 06.04.2011 WHICH WAS FILED BEFORE THE CONCERNED ASSESSING O FFICER. THE COPY OF THE SAID RETRACTION STATEMENT ALONG WITH ANN EXURE IS ATTACHED AT PAGES 1 TO 8 OF THE PAPER BOOK. BY THE S AID RETRACTION ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 8 STATEMENT, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT IT HAD REVISED ITS DIS CLOSURE OF UNACCOUNTED AND UNDISCLOSED INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF PARKING AND MSEB CHARGES FROM RS.3,43,83,500/- TO RS.2,78,83,500/-. IN THE SA ID STATEMENT, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT IT HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY PARKING AND MSEB CHARGES FROM ROW HOUSES AND TWIN BUNGALOW HO LDERS. FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE POINTS OUT THAT TH E DIFFERENCE WAS ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE TB NO.14 SOLD TO ONE SHRI P.K. PAT IL WHEREIN, IN THE ORIGINAL ANNEXURE A PREPARED DURING THE COURSE OF S URVEY, THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS TAKEN AT RS.3 LAKHS WHEREAS ON RE CONCILIATION IT TRANSPIRES THAT IN FACT, THE DIFFERENCE WAS RS.75,000/-. CONSEQUENTLY, A SUM OF RS.2,25,000/- WAS NOT OFFERED AS AD DITIONAL INCOME VIS--VIS THE SAID TWIN BUNGALOWS. THE ADDITIONAL INCO ME WAS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER THE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF TH E VARIOUS PROPERTIES SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE WERE TABULATED BY THE SURVEY TEAM ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS FOUND FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE A SSESSEE, WHICH REFLECTED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ACTUAL SALE CONSIDERA TION AND THE AGREEMENT VALUE. HOWEVER, BY WAY OF RETRACTION STAT EMENT, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT IT HAD VERIFIED THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMEN TS AND PAPERS AND NO PARKING CHARGES WERE RECEIVED FROM ROW H OUSES AND TWIN BUNGALOW HOLDERS. THE UNDISCLOSED AND UNACCOUNTED IN COME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TABULATED BY THE SURVEY TEAM ON THE BASIS OF THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESS EE BEFORE THE SURVEY TEAM WAS THAT IT HAD RECEIVED CERTAIN CHARG ES AGAINST THE PROPERTIES SOLD BY IT WHICH WERE NOT DISCLOSED IN THE RETU RN OF INCOME. CONSEQUENTLY, THE TABULATION OF ADDITIONAL INCOME IN THE HAN DS OF THE ASSESSEE AND BASIS FOR SUCH TABULATION OF SUCH UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS THE DOCUMENTS FOUND FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE ASSESSEE IN FIRST ROUND SURRENDERED INCOME, WHICH WAS RET RACTED BY THE ASSESSEE BY THE RETRACTION STATEMENT FILED BEFORE TH E ASSESSING ITA NO.815/PN/2013 V S KALBHOR & ASSOCIATES 9 OFFICER, COGNIZANCE OF WHICH HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN EITHER BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER OR THE CIT(A). THE ONUS IS FULLY UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN WITH EVIDENCE AS TO THE REASON WHY IT IS RETRACT ING FROM ITS EARLIER DISCLOSURE OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT TO RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFIC ER FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER ALLOWING REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 14. THE ISSUE IN GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSES SEE IS AGAINST THE CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT, WHICH IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE. HENCE, THE GROUND O F APPEAL NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 15. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 16 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 16 TH DECEMBER, 2014. GCVSR COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-V, PUNE; 4) THE CIT-V, PUNE; 5) THE DR A BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PUNE