The Income tax Officer, BATALA V. Sh. Madan Lal, BATALA

ITA 89/ASR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 8920914 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PADAM BAHL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 133A; 147; 69; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.71(ASR)/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2003-04 PAN : AAUPL5021C SH. MADAN LAL VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PROP. MADAN DI HATTI, WARD 2(3), BATALA. DERA ROAD, BATALA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.89(ASR)/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2003-04 PAN : AAUPL5021C INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SH. MADAN LAL WARD 2(3), BATALA. PROP. MADAN DI HATTI, DERA ROAD, BATALA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SH. PADAM BAHL, CA DEPARTMENT BY:SH.MAHAVIR SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING: 27/02/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:31/03/2014 ORDER PER BENCH ; ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 2 THESE CROSS APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENU E ARISE FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AMRITSAR, DATED 23.12.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIR MING THE ADDITION OF RS.65,09,350/- MADE BY THE ITO, WARD-2( 3), BATALA ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PA WNING BUSINESS BASED ON ANNEXURE A-II, IMPOUNDED DURING S URVEY U/S 133A. 2. THAT BOTH THE LD. CIT(A), AMRITSAR AND ITO WARD 2(3) BATALA HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE SAID ANNEXURE A- II PERTAINED TO PERIOD 1999 ONWARDS AND THE TRANSACTIONS DURING THE PERIOD 01.04.2001 TO 31.03.2002 ALSO AMOUNTED TO RS.1,47,0 5,296/- I.E MORE THAN THE TRANSACTIONS IN A/YEAR 2003-04. 3. THAT BOTH THE LD. CIT(A), AMRITSAR AND ITO WARD 2(3) BATALA HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ALLEGED UNEXPLAI NED INVESTMENT WORKED OUT IN A/YEAR 2003-04 WAS OUT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT OF EARLIER YEARS AND THE SAM E COULD NOT BE ASSESSED AGAINST IN A/YEAR 2003-04. 4. THAT BOTH THE LD. CIT(A), AMRITSAR AND ITO WARD 2(3) BATALA HAVE COMPLETELY IGNORED THE FACT THAT IN EVERY BUSI NESS OF LENDING MONEY THE ASSESSEE IS BOUND TO RECEIVED BAC K THE LENT AMOUNT AFTER SOME TIME AND IT IS ONLY THE PEAK INVE STMENT WHICH WAS TO BE CONSIDERED. 5. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT PRO PERLY APPRECIATING THE ENTIRES RECORDED IN ANNEXURE A-1 P ERTAINING TO PERIOD 01.04.2009 TO 19.09.2009 WHICH WAS ALSO IMPO UNDED ALONGWITH ANNEXURE A-II DURING SURVEY PROCEEDINGS A ND HIS ORDER IS PERVERSE TO THAT EXTENT. 6. THAT BOTH THE LD. CIT(A), AMRITSAR AND ITO WARD 2(3) BATALA HAVE GROSSLY ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION ON ACC OUNT OF ALLEGED INTEREST OF RS.27,91,904/- COMPUTED @ 24% O N THE ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 3 ALLEGED INVESTMENT OF RS.1,66,32,935/- WITHOUT APP RECIATING THAT INTEREST IS EARNED ON DAY TO DAY BASIS. 7. THAT BOTH THE LD. CIT(A), AMRITSAR AND ITO WARD 2(3) BATALA HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT ALLEGED INTEREST EAR NED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS.27,91,904/- WAS ALSO AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR INVESTMENT IN BUSINESS. 8. THAT THE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT TH E BENEFIT OF TELESCOPING HAD TO BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ENTIRE ALLEGED INTEREST EARNED AT RS.27,91,904/- TOWARDS ALLEGED P EAK INVESTMENT IN BUSINESS U/S 69 OF THE ACT AND IN RES TRICTING THIS BENEFIT TO RS.6,11,904/- ONLY. 2. THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 89(ASR)/2012 HAS RAISED F OLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE PEAK INVESTMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS TO RS.65,09,350/- ON ESTIMATE BASIS AS OBS ERVED IN PARA 12.15 & 12.18 OF HIS APPELLATE ORDER AS AGAINST RS. 1,07,50,485/- RIGHTLY WORKED BY THE A.O. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE VALUE OF C ODE T & L AS PER IMPOUNDED RECORDS HAS RIGHTLY BEEN TAKEN BY THE A.O. AS THREE ZERO AND FOUR ZERO RESPECTIVELY. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS NOT PROVED THE AUTHENTICITY OF VOUCHERS IN RESPECT OF AMOUNT C LAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BACK BY HIM. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT INTEREST AT TH E RATE OF 24% OF PAWNING BUSINESS HAS RIGHTLY BEEN ASSESSED AT RS .27,91,904/- ON AMOUNT ADVANCED AT RS.1,16,32,935/- AS PER ENTRI ES IN ANNEXURE A-II, IMPOUNDED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVE Y U/S 133A OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 4 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS HEARD AND DISPOSED OFF. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE APPEALS OF T HE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE ARE THAT THE ORIGINAL RETURN WAS FILED ON 1 7.12.2003 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,34,793/- INCLUDING SHORT TERM CAPIT AL GAIN OF RS.1,14,500/- ON SALE OF 18 MARLA LAND. THE P & L A/C FURNISHED W ITH RETURN REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVES INCOME FROM MULTIFARIOUS SOURC ES I.E. PURCHASES & SALES OF GOLD/SILVER JEWELLERY, INTEREST AND LABOUR INCOM E. GROSS RECEIPTS FROM INTEREST HAVE BEEN SHOWN AT RS.2,92,015/- AND PAYME NT AT RS.2,98,558/- TO THE FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE SONS AND WIFE OF THE ASS ESSEE. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) ON 31.03.2004. LATER ON, SURVE Y U/S 133A OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED ON 09.03.2010 ON THE BUSINESS PREMISE S OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF WHICH SOME DOCUMENTS WERE IMP OUNDED. NO REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND VOUCHERS FOR ANY OF THE ASSES SMENT YEARS WERE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY AT THE BUSINESS PREMISE S OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SURVEY PARTY REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. VARIOUS PRETEXTS, INCLUDING THE PLEA THAT THE ACCOU NT BOOKS WERE WITH THE ACCOUNTANT, WERE RAISED, STATEMENT OF THE ACCOUNTA NT WAS ALSO RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, WHO NEGATED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THE BOOKS WERE NOT PRODUCED EVEN DURING POST SURVEY ENQ UIRIES. THE AO ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 5 EXAMINED THE IMPOUNDED MATERIAL WHICH IS ONE OLD BA HI CONTAINING 242 LEAVES ALSO CONTAINS THE PERIOD 01.04.2002 TO 31.0 3.2003 WITH PAGES STARTING FROM 108 TO 141. THE AO FOUND THAT: (A) THIS BOOK SHOWS THE DAILY RECEIPTS AND EXPENSES . THE ENTRIES OF DAY TO DAY BUSINESS ARE ALSO ENORMOUS AND DO NOT MA TCH WITH THE INCOME SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE EVADED TO GIVE ANY EXPLANATION, WHATSOEVER IN THE COURSE OF SURVEY OPERATION U/S 133A IN SUPPORT OF ENTRIES MADE IN BAHI. IN VIEW OF THE ENTRIES IN THIS BAHI, THE AO FORMED THE BELIEF THAT THE INTEREST IN COME SHOWN AT RS.2,92,015/- IS PRIMA FACIE INCORRECT AND INVESTME NT IN PAWNING BUSINESS IS ALSO NOT PROPERLY REFLECTED. B) THE RECEIPT OF CLAIMED LOAN OF RS.2,50,000/- FRO M SH. VEER SINGH IN THE BALANCE SHEET FILED WITH THE RETURN DI D NOT APPEAR IN THE ANNEXURE A-II. C) SALE OF KOTHI FOR RS.4,85,000/- WAS REFLECTED IN ANNEXURE A-1 BUT NO CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE WAS SHOWN BY THE ASSESS EE IN HIS RETURN. THE AO ESTIMATED THE GAIN AT RS. 2 LACS. D) THE IMPOUNDED ANNEXURE A-II SHOWED INVESTMENT OF RS.3,00,000/- ON 17.03.2003 WITH BRITISH INDIA CO; WHICH WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE B/SHEET. 3. THE AO THEREAFTER, ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 AFTER O BTAINING PRIOR APPROVAL OF ADDL. CIT, R-II, AMRITSAR TO ASSESSEE THE UNDISC LOSED INTEREST INCOME AND UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS AS ALSO FAKE LOAN IN THE NAME OF SH. VEER SINGH, UNDISCLOSED CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF KOTHI AND UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT WITH BRITISH INDIA COMPANY. NOTICE U/S 4 8 DATED 25.03.2010 WAS DULY SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ON 26.03.2010. IN RE SPONSE THERETO, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN ON 26.04.2010 DECLARING INCOM E OF RS.1,34,793/- AS ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 6 ORIGINALLY RETURNED VIDE RETURN FILED ON 17.12.2003 . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TAKEN UP SCRUTINY BY THE AO AFTER SUPPLYING TH E COPIES OF REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF THE CASE ON 05.05.2010. D ETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE ALONGWITH NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 02.07.2010 FIXING THE CASE FOR 08.07.2010 AND THEREAFTER VARIOUS OPPORTUN ITIES WERE ALLOWED BY THE AO TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS/DOCUME NTS/VOUCHERS. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE COMPUTERIZED CASH BOOK AND LE DGER, WHICH WAS FOUND BY THE AO TO BE NEWLY BINDED. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT THE ORIGINAL BOOKS WERE WRITTEN MANUALLY, WHICH WERE DEFACED IN FLOOD THAT CAME SOME YEARS BACK. FROM THOSE BOOKS, WHICH ARE STILL AVAILABLE W ITH THEM, THE DATA HAS BEEN COMPUTERIZED ABOUT 3-4 MONTHS BACK AFTER THE S URVEY IN MARCH, 2010. HOWEVER, EVEN ON REQUISITION BY THE AO, THE ORIGINA L BOOKS WERE NOT PRODUCED AND ULTIMATELY ON 23.09.2010 THE ASSESSEE AND HIS COUNSEL STATED THAT ALL THE ACCOUNT BOOKS FROM AY 03-04 TO 08-09 H AVE BEEN DESTROYED AND CANNOT BE PRODUCED. 3.1. THE AO CARRIED OUT VERIFICATION OF ENTRIES APP EARING IN ANNEXURE A-II WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE. WITH REGARD TO ENTRIES AGAINST WHICH GOLD GIVEN WAS WRITTEN, IT WAS STATED THAT IT MEANS THAT GOLD WAS RETAINED BY HIM AND AMOUNT WAS LENT ON INTEREST. IN REPLY TO T AN D L APPEARING AGAINST CERTAIN ENTRIES, IT WAS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT WHEREAS T STANDS FOR TWO ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 7 ZEROES L STANDS FOR THREE ZEROES. IN VIEW OF TH E STAND OF THE ASSESSEE, THE AO CLOSELY EXAMINED THE ENTRIES IN ANNEXURE A-II WI TH REFERENCE TO THEIR CORRESPONDING EFFECT IN BANK ACCOUNT AND OTHER ACCO UNTS. SUCH EXERCISE OF THE AO CULMINATED TO ESTABLISH THAT T REPRESENTED 000 AND L 00000 I.E. THOUSAND AND LAC RESPECTIVELY AS IS CLEAR FROM THE FOLLOWING CHART: SR.NO. PG. NO.A-11 DESCRIPTION OF ENTRY REMARKS 1. 6 BACKSIDE 4/7/2000 2.40 60T TOTAL 3L THIS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT 60 T REPRESENTS RS.60,000/- AND WHEN IT IS ADDED TO 2.40 IT GIVES THE TOTAL 3 LACS. 2. -DO- 20.06.20000 1L. 50 TOTAL 1.50T THIS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT 50T REPRESENTS RS.50,000/- AND WHEN IT IS ADDED TO 1L IT GIVES THE TOTAL 1 LAC FIFTY THOUSANDS 3. 11 BACKSIDE 14.07.2000 32,000 18,000 50T THERE REMAINS NO DOUBT THAT 50T REPRESENTS RS.50,000/- BECAUSE RS.50,000 ADDED TO RS.50,000 GIVES TOTAL RS. 1 LAC 4. 12 AND BACKSIDE 12 SATNAM WARAICH 18.07.2000 50,000/- 20.07.2000 50T 1 LAC THERE REMAINS NO DOUBT THAT 50T REPRESENTS RS.50,000/- BECAUSE RS.50,000/- ADDED TO RS.50,000 GIVES TOTAL RS. 1 LAC 5. PAGE 13 24.7.2000 KARTAR BEN 72T 72+50+1.22L THERE REMAINS NO DOUBT THAT 72T REPRESENTS RS.72,000/- BECAUSE RS.50,000/- ADDED TO RS.72,000 GIVES TOTAL RS.1.22 LACS 6. PAGE 14 20.07.2000 KAILASH UNCLE 19,950 SINCE 50,000 ADDED TO 19,950 GIVES TOTAL 20,000, 20T WRITTEN CLEARLY SHOWS 20,000/- AND ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 8 50 20T THAT T REPRESENTS THOUSAND. 7. 21 BACKSIDE 6.9.2000 RAMESH 35,000] 15,000] 50T SINCE 15,000 ADDED TO 35,000 GIVES TOTAL 50,000, 50T WRITTEN CLEARLY SHOWS 50,000/- AND THAT T REPRESENTS THOUSAND. 8. 29 BACKSIDE 21.10.2000 KARTAR 10,000 + 10T 10,000 IS WRITTEN THEN LAST THREE ZEROS ARE STRUCK AND T IS WRITTEN INDICATING THAT T REPRESENTS 3 ZEROS. 9. 30 BACKSIDE 1.11.2000 AJAY MAMAJI 4L 50T : 3.50T 50 4L THE INESCAPABLE CONCLUSION IS THAT 4 L (FOUR LACS) MINUS 50T(50,000)+ 3.50T (3,50,000) + 50 + 4 L (4,00,000) AND HENCE L REPRESENTS LAC AND T THOUSAND 10. -DO- 2.11.2000 MUKHTIAR 2L 3L : 5 L 2.27 TOTAL:5.27 L THE INESCAPABLE CONCLUSION IS THAT 2 L (TWO LACS ) PLUS 3 L(THREE LACS)+RS.5 LACS AND FURTHER TO THAT WHEN 2.27 LAC IS ADDED IT GIVEN TOTAL OF RS.7.27 LACS. 11. 31 2.11.2000 SATPAL AULAKH BERI 1 L (ONE LAC) CLEARLY MENTIONED AHT 1 L REPRESENTS ONE LAC. 12. 39 18.12.2000 SHINDA 2L 8L : 10 L 9 L L 1 CLEARLY MENTION THAT 2 + 8 L REPRESENTS TEN LAKH AND REDUCING 9 LAKHS BALANCE REMAINS 1 LAKH 13 33 16.11.2000 BUNTY 10T 850 : 18.850 CLEALRY INDICATED THAT 10T REPRESENTS 10,000 BECAUSE SO THAT BY ADDING 850 TOTAL MENTIONED IS 10,850 14 BACKSIDE 33 & 34 MUKHTIAR 20.11.2000 5T 20T 22.11.2000 10T TOTAL 35,000 MENTIONING TOTAL OF 5T, 20T AND 10T AS 35,000 LEAVES NO DOUBT THAT T REPRESENTS THOUSANDS I.E. (000) ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 9 15. 36 7.12.2000 PYASA 50T 53,000 8.3.2001 CLEARLY INDICATES THAT 50T IS 50,000/- AND AMOUNT ADVANCE ON 7.12.2000 BECOMES RS.53,000 AS ON 8.3.2001 AFTER ADDING ACCRUED INTEREST ON IT. 16 38 13.12.2000 20T 1.12.999 TO 1.2.00 58 24,800 CLEARLY INDICATES THAT AMOUNT OF RS.20,000/- HAS BECOME RS.24,800/- AFTER ONE YEAR INCLUDING INTEREST OF RS.4800 17. 38 BACKSIDE GURMUKH SINGH 80T 20% ANNUAL INTT. AFTER ONE YEAR 16,000/- CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE AMOUNT IS RS.80,000/- ON WHICH INTT. @ 20% PA WILL BE RS.16,000 18. 112 BACKSIDE 24.05.2002 1L DEPOSITED IN TOWN A/C COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT SHOWS THAT AMOUNT DEPOSITED IS RS. 1 LAC MEANING THEREBY IN UNEQUIVOCAL TERMS THAT L STANDS FOR ONE LAC 19 128 BACKSIDE 25.10.2002 1L PAID TO TOP ONE FINVEST LEASING PVT. LTD. FROM OWN ACCOUNT. COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT SHOWS THAT CHEQUE ISSUED FOR RS. 1 LAC MEANING THEREBY IN UNEQUIVOCAL TERMS THAT L STANDS FOR ONE LAC. 3.2. WITH REGARD TO CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF KOTHI, THE ASSESSEE PROPERLY EXPLAINED THAT THE INDEXED COST OF LAND AND CONSTRU CTION EXCEEDED THE SALE PRICE AND AS SUCH NO CAPITAL GAIN AROSE. LOAN FROM SH. VEER SINGH WAS FOUND TO BE RECEIVED BY CHEQUE WHICH WAS CREDITED IN THE SAVING ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH SBI. SIMILARLY THE AMOUNT APPEARING IN ACCOUNT OF BRITISH INDIA CO. WAS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN PAID ON BEHALF OF M/S. ASHIANA COLONIZERS ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 10 AND APPEARED IN THEIR ACCOUNT. NO ADVERSE VIEW WAS, THEREFORE, TAKEN/CONSIDERED ON THESE THREE COUNTS. THE AO, THE REFORE, CONFINED TO THE TWO ISSUES ONLY VIZ (I) PEAK INVESTMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS (II) AMOUNT OF INTEREST ON THE PAWNED AMOUNT. THE AO PREPARED A CH ART FROM ANNEXURE A- II IN WHICH THE PAYMENT ENTRIES HAVE BEEN TABULATED AND THE ENTRIES WHICH HAVE BEEN STRUCK OFF HAVE SEPARATELY BEEN TABULATE D UNDER THE HEAD RECEIPT. TOTAL OF THESE ENTRIES COMES TO RS.94,26,240/- AND RS.6,59,170/- RESPECTIVELY. FURTHER THE AO FOUND THAT IN THE CASH BOOK PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN ENTRIES OF PAYMENT S, WHICH HAVE BEEN DETAILED IN APPENDIX B ATTACHED WITH NOTICE DATED 1 0.12.2010. TOTAL OF THESE ENTRIES COMES TO RS.27,75,865/-. ON THE BASIS OF A BOVE DATA, THE AMOUNT ADVANCED IN PAWNING BUSINESS WAS WORKED OUT BY THE AO AS UNDER: A) AS PER CHART PREPARED FROM ANNEXURE A-II (94,26, 240-5,69,170) RS.88,57,070/- B) ENTRIES APPEARING IN CASH BOOK OTHER THAN ABOVE AS DETAILED IN APPENDIX B RS.27,75,865 /- TOTAL RS.1,16,32,935/- LESS: AMOUNT SHOWN OUTSTANDING BY ASSESSEE IN BALAN CE SHEET FILED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. RS.8,92,450/- UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS: RS.1,07 ,40,485/- ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 11 4. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE MADE SUBMISS IONS, WHICH WERE FORWARDED TO THE AO FOR COMMENTS AND THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER OBTAINING THE COMMENTS AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SUBMISSI ONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND COMMENTS OF THE AO VIDE HIS ORDER IN PARA 12 TO 13 (PAGES 30 TO 35) ALLOWED THE RELIEF OF RS. 42,31,135/- OUT OF THE AD DITION MADE OF RS.1,07,40,485/- AND FURTHER ALLOWED A RELIEF OF RS .6,11,904/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. PADAM BAHL , CA ARGUED ON THE SIMILAR LINES AS SUBMITTED AND ARGUED BEFORE THE L D. CIT(A). 6. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED UPON THE O RDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. ON PERUSING THE SEIZED MATERIAL AND VARIOUS ANNEXUR ES POINTED OUT BY MR. PADAM BAHL, CA APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE LD. DR, WE CONCUR WITH THE VIEWS OF THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE AO PREPARED A CHART FROM ANNEXURE A-II IN WHICH THE PA YMENT ENTRIES HAVE BEEN TABULATED AND THE ENTRIES WHICH HAVE BEEN STRU CK OFF HAVE SEPARATELY BEEN TABULATED UNDER THE HEAD RECEIPT. THE TOTAL AM OUNT OF ADVANCES MADE DURING THE ACCOUNT PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR UNDER ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 12 CONSIDERATION WORKED OUT TO RS.94,26,240/-. THOUGH NO DATE AND YEAR HAS BEEN MENTIONED AGAINST THE ENTRIES STRUCK OFF, THE AO, TO BE FAIR TO THE ASSESSEE, HAS CONSIDERED THESE AMOUNTS AS AMOUNT RE CEIVED BACK DURING THE YEAR, WHICH AMOUNTED TO RS.5,69,170/-. THE RESULTAN T AMOUNT OF RS.88,57,070/- (RS.94,26,240/- - RS.5,69,170/-) HAS BEEN CONSIDERED AS THE AMUNT ADVANCED IN PAWNING BUSINESS. THESE FIGURES W ERE WORKED ON THE BASIS OF DECODING DONE BY THE AO THAT T REPRESENTED THOUSAND AND L REPRESENTED LAC AGAINST CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THESE MEANT HUNDRED AND THOUSAND RESPECTIVELY. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS BEFORE THE AO THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN CHALLENGING THE DECODING OF THE A O. HOWEVER, DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE DECODING HAS BEEN ACCEPTE D BY THE ASSESSEE. REJECTION OF COMPUTERIZED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT CLAIM ED PREPARED FROM OLD REGULAR BOOKS, WHICH WERE ADMITTED TO HAVE BEEN DES TROYED AND NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO, HAS ALSO NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND LIKEWISE APPLICABILITY OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) HAS ALSO NOT BEEN DISPUTED. THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE MANNER OF COMPUTATION OF INCOME AFTER REJECTION OF BOOKS O F ACCOUNT. IN THIS REGARD, THE MAIN THRUST OF THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT WHEN THE SO CALLED CASH BOOK WAS REJECTED, THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ADDI NG RS.27,75,865/- ON ACCOUNT OF ENTRIES APPEARING IN THE SAID CASH BOOK BUT NOT REFLECTED IN ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 13 ANNEXURE A-II. THE AO IN HIS REMAND REPORT DATED 29 .4.2011 HAS FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ON THIS PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE . DURING EXAMINATION OF THE CASE AND SO CALLED CASH B OOK PRODUCED, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO CLARIFY THE POSITION W ITH REGARD TO ENTRIES APPEARING IN THE CASH BOOK AMOUNTING TO RS.27,75,86 5/- BUT NOT REFLECTED IN A-II. THE ASSESSEE GAVE EVASIVE REPLY IN THE FOLLOWING WORDS:- AS FAR AS THE ENTRIES APPEARING IN THE CASH BOOK A RE CONCERNED WHICH DOES NOT APPEAR IN A-II HAS NO EFFECT IN THE ASSESSMENT AS IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT IT SHOULD APPEAR IN THE A-II IT WAS UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ADDITION WAS MADE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE CASH BOOK HAS BEEN FINALLY REJECTED AND A SSESSMENT FRAMED ON THE BASIS OF ANNEXURE A-II, NECESSARY RELIEF MAY BE ALLOWED ON MERITS CONSIDERING THE FINAL POSITION THAT EMERGES IN THIS CASE. 7.1. SINCE THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AS DISCUSSED, SUPRA, REJECTION OF COMPUTERIZED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, CLAIM PREPARED OLD REGULAR BOOKS, WHICH WERE ADMITTED TO HAVE BEEN DESTROYED AND NOT PRODUC ED BEFORE THE AO, HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AO WAS NOT J USTIFIED IN ADDING THIS AMOUNT OF RS.27,75,865/- TO THE FIGURE OF AMOUNT AD VANCED IN PAWNING BUSINESS. THE SECOND LIMB OF SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASS ESSEE IS THAT IN PAWNING BUSINESS THE AMOUNT KEEPS ON RELATING AS THE ADVANC ES MADE ARE RECEIVED BACK AFTER SOME TIME AND FRESH ADVANCES ARE MADE AN D AS SUCH THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF ADVANCES CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS AMOUNT I NVESTED IN PAWNING BUSINESS. IN THIS REGARD THE LD. COUNSEL PLACED REL IANCE ON ANNEXURE A-1, WHICH IS RECORD OF AMOUNTS ADVANCED, AMOUNTS R ECEIVED BACK AND ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 14 INTEREST SHOWN THEREON FROM 01.04.2009 TO 190.08.20 09. ON BEING CONFRONTED, THE AO TO TAKE A RATIONAL AND APPROPRIA TE VIEW, LEDGERISED THE ENTRIES APPEARING IN ANNEXURE A-1 ON AN EXCEL SHEE T AS PER WHICH THE FOLLOWING POSITION EMERGES: AMOUNTS ADVANCED FROM 01.04.2009 TO 19.08.2009 (UPTO WHICH DATE DATA FOR ADVANCES IS AVAILABLE IN THIS ANNEXURE) RS.1,06,68,795/- AMOUNTS RECEIVED BACK FROM 01.04.2009 TO 19.08.2009 RS. 30,63,125/- ADVANCES RECEIVED BACK AFTER 19.08.2009 RS.41,884 75/- PEAK AMT. OF THE BALANCE CONSIDERING THE ADVANCES & AMT. RECEIVED BACK AS ON 19.08.2009 RS.76,05,67 0/- IN ANNEXURE A-1, THE RECORD OF ADVANCES MADE IS AVA ILABLE UPTO 19.08.2009 ONLY WHEREAS ADVANCES RECEIVED BACK IS P OSTED UPTO 07.03.2010. IF THE FIGURES ARE EXTRAPOLATED FOR TH E WHOLE YEAR, THE PEAK WOULD COME TO RS.19688436/- AS UNDER: PEAK AMOUNT OF ADVANCES MADE AS ON 19.08.2009 (FOR 141 DAYS FROM 01.04.2009 TO 19.08.2009) RS.76 .05,670/- PEAK AT THE END OF THE YEAR ON PRO RATA BASIS RS.76,05,670/- X 365/141 RS.1,96,88,436/- THIS FIGURE OF RS.1,96,88,436/- SHOULD INCREASE FUR THER AS TO THIS THE ADVANCES OUTSTANDING PRIOR TO 31.03.2009 ARE TO BE ADDED. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AO THAT ON THE BASIS OF THIS MET ICULOUS WORKING FROM ANNEXURE A-1 IF REVERSE EXERCISE IS DONE BY RE DUCING BALANCE METHOD I.E. DEDUCTING INTEREST EARNED OVER THE YEAR S AND AMOUNTS WITHDRAWN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR VARIOUS INVESTMENTS, THE ADVANCES IN PAWNING BUSINESS IN ASSTT. YEAR UNDER APPEAL WOULD IN NO CASE BE LESS THAN RS.1 CRORE CARRIES WEIGHT. ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 15 7.2. THE ABOVE WORKING OF THE AO HAS NOT BEEN DISP UTED BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE. BUT HE MAINTAINED THAT HIS RELIANCE ON AN NEXURE A-1 WAS FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF PROVING THAT IN PAWNING BUSINESS THE AMOUNT KEEPS IN ROTATING AND THE PEAK INVESTMENT IN BUSINESS IS MU CH LESS THAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF ADVANCES. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS WORTH WHILE TO NOTE THAT ANNEXURE A-1 IS AN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT. IT WAS IMPOUN DED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY ALONGWITH ANNEXURE A-II AND OTHER DOCUMEN TS. IT HAS, THEREFORE, EQUAL EVIDENTIARY VALUE AS THAT OF ANNEXURE A-II. I T IS A DIFFERENT MATTER THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO COMPUTED THE INCOME ON THE BASIS OF ENTRIES IN ANNEXURE A-II AFTER CONFRONTING HIS CALCULATIONS TO THE ASSESSEE AT WHICH STAGE MAINLY THE DECODING OF ENTR IES WITH REGARD TO T & L STANDING FOR THOUSAND AND LAC WAS BEING CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. ASSESSEES STAND FOR TAKING COGNIZANCE OF ANNEXURE A-1 FOR LIMITED PURPOSE ONLY IS, THEREFORE, REJECTED AND THIS ANNEXURE IS BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPO SE OF PEAK INVESTMENT FOR THE A.Y. UNDER CONSIDERATION. NOW COMING TO TH E PEAK INVESTMENT TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE ASSTT. YEAR UNDER APPEAL, THE FO LLOWING FACTS HAVE TO BE BROUGHT IN CLOSE FOCUS: I) THE PEAK INVESTMENT WORKED OUT BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF ANNEXURE-II BEING TOTAL OF ADVANCES MADE AS REDUCE D BY THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED BACK FOR AY UNDER APPEAL: RS.88,57,070 /- ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 16 II) THE PEAK INVESTMENT WORKED OUT BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF ANNEXURE A-1 AS PER EXCEL SHEET PREPARED FOR AMOUNTS ADVANCES MADE AND RECEIVED BACK AS ON 19.08.2009 UPTO WHICH DATE THE DATA FOR ADVANCES IS AVAILABLE IN HIS ANNEXURE RS. 76,05,670/- III) THE PEAK INVESTMENT ESTIMATED BY THE AO FOR AY UNDER APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF ANNEXURE A-1 CONSIDERING THE AMOUNT OF ADVANCES AVAILABLE AS ON 31.03.2009 TO BE ADDED TO ABOVE FIGURE AND REVERSE EXERCISE TO BE DONE FOR THE INTEREST EARNED OVER THE YEARS. RS.1,00,00,000/- THE AO HAS ALSO WORKED OUT THE PEAK AS ON 31.03.201 0 AT RS.1,96,88,436/- ON PRO-RATA BASIS CONSIDERING THE PEAK AS ON 19.08. 2009. HOWEVER, THIS METHOD IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND NOT BASED ON ANY ACCOUN TING PRINCIPLES. THOUGH THE FIGURE OF RS. 1 CRORE APPEARS TO BE MORE REALIS TIC CONSIDERING THE FACTS MENTIONED IN (II)( & (III) ABOVE, YET IT INVOLVES S OME GUESS WORK AS THE EXACT AMOUNT OF ADVANCES AVAILABLE AS ON 31.03.2009 AND INTEREST EARNED OVER DIFFERENT INTERVENING YEARS HAS NOT BEEN EXACTLY QU ANTIFIED. HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COME FORWARD TO CONTROVERT THE WORKING ESTIMATE OF THE AO. CONSIDERING THE TOTALI TY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS OF TH E OPINION THAT PEAK INVESTMENTS OF RS.90 LACS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR U NDER APPEAL WOULD BE JUSTIFIED IN THIS CASE. 7.3. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMED THAT IN THE ACCOUNT PERIOD 01.04.2001 TO 31.03.2002, THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF ADVANCES MADE IS RS .1,47,15,296/- AS PER ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 17 ANNEXURE A-II AND SINCE THIS IS MORE THAN THE UNEXP LAINED INVESTMENT ADDED BY THE AO, NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR AS FUNDS TO TH IS EXTENT WERE ALREADY AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE IN THE EARLIER YEAR. TH E LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT IN WORKING OUT THIS FIGURE OF RS.1,47,15,296/-, THE ASSESSEE HAS ADOPTED THE NARRATION MENTIONED AGAINST THE ENTRIES AS T & L AS THOUSAND AND LAC. IN HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSION THE LD. COUNSEL VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT SINCE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL, THE AO HAS ADOPTED T & L AS THOUSAND AND LAC THE SAME HAS TO BE ADOPTED FOR THE ACCOUNT PER IOD RELEVANT TO THE A.Y. 2002-03. THE AO ALSO MAINTAINED THAT HE HAD DONE D ECODING OF ENTRIES WITH THE MENTION T & L TO MEAN THOUSAND AND LAC WITH C ORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE BY CO-RELATING 19 ENTRIES WITH SUCH NARRATION WITH THEIR EFFECT IN BANK AND OTHER ACCOUNTS AS MENTIONED IN THE CHART APPEARING ON PAGE 5 TO 7 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. SINCE AS PER AO, THESE ENTRIES FELL WITHIN THE ACCOUNT PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 UNDE R APPEAL THE DECODING WAS APPLICABLE TO AY 2003-04 ONLY. THE AO FURTHER ARGUED THAT AS APPLICABILITY TO EARLIER PERIOD OR ANY OTHER PERIO D WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED AND EXAMINED INDEPENDENTLY AND AS SUCH I T IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO COME FORWARD AND ESTABLISH THAT IN THE ACCOUNT PERI OD RELEVANT TO THE AY 2002-03 ALSO THE ENTRIES WITH NARRATION T & L WER E FOR THOUSAND AND LAC. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COME FORWARD TO ESTABLISH WITH ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 18 CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE HIS CLAIM AND ONLY LAID STR ESS ON THE PLEA THAT DIFFERENT MEANING CANNOT BE ASSIGNED TO ONE NARRATI ON FOR DIFFERENT PERIODS COVERED BY ONE DOCUMENT AND ONCE IT IS HELD BY THE AO THAT T & L WERE FOR THOUSAND AND LAC FOR THE AY 2003-04, WHICH HAS BEE N ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT HAS TO APPLY FOR AY 2002-03. THIS PLE A OF THE LD. COUNSEL IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. THE AO HAS DONE DECODING IN RESPECT OF ENTRIES FOR ACCOUNT PERIOD RELEVANT TO AY UNDER APPEAL WITH CORROBORATI VE EVIDENCE. THE AO HAS SCALED DOWN THE WORKING OF TRANSACTIONS OF RS.1 ,47,05,296/- DONE BY THE ASSESSEE FOR AY 2002-03 TO RS.27,88,036/- WITHOUT D ECODING OF T & L . THUS, THE WORKING OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS AO IS OF ACADEMIC NATURE ONLY AND NEEDS NO ADJUDICATION. IN THIS CASE ASSESSMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03 HAS ALREADY ATTAINED FINALITY. WITH THE RETURN FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03, THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED BALANCE SHEET. THUS, THAT BALANCE SHEET I S FINAL. PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF REVEN UE TO ASSESS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO RAISE NEW ISSUES DURING REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS EVEN FOR THE SAME A SSESSMENT YEAR WHAT TO TALK OF EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS. IN THE BALANCE SH EET FOR THE AY 2002-03, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN SUNDRY CREDITORS AT RS.9,50,200/ - FOR WHICH AMOUNT CREDIT WILL BE AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE. ANOTHER PL EA OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST EARNED DURING THE YEAR SHOUL D BE REDUCED FROM THE ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 19 PEAK AMOUNT. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THER E IS DOUBLE ADDITION OF RS.27,91,904/- ONCE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST CALCULAT ED ON PEAK INVESTMENT AND THEN THE SAME HAVING BEEN CONSIDERED IN UNEXPLA INED INVESTMENT AS THE INTEREST EARNED WAS SEPARATELY AVAILABLE FOR INVEST MENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS. THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ACCEPTABLE. INTE REST ON THE PAWNED AMOUNT IS EARNED ON DAY TO DAY BASIS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. HOWEVER, THE INTEREST WHICH IS AVAILABLE FOR REINVESTMENT IS THE INTEREST ON AMOUNTS WHICH ARE RECEIVED BACK WITH INTEREST. FOR THE ACCOUNT PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE FOOL PROOF RECORD OF RECEIPT BACK IS NOT AVAILABLE. HOWEVER, ANNEXURE A-1 IMPOUNDED IS C OMPLETE RECORD IN THIS REGARD FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2009 TO 19.09.2009 FROM THE ANNEXURE, IT IS FOUND THAT THE ADVANCES DURING THE PERIOD AMOUNTED TO RS.1,06,68,795/-. THE RATIO OF RECEIPT BACK WORKS OUT TO BE 28.71% OF THE ADVANCES MADE [RS.30,63,125/RS.1,06,68,705/- X 100]. ACCORDINGLY IT CAN BE CONCLUDED THAT OUT OF INTEREST EARNED DURING THE YEAR ONLY 28.71% WAS AVAILABLE FOR INVESTMENT. TO BE MORE RATIONAL THE RATIO IS TAKEN AT 30% IN ROUND FIGURES. THEREFORE, 30% OF THE INTEREST IS CONSIDERED TO HAV E BEEN REINVESTED IN THE PAWNED AMOUNT. ON THE AMOUNT OF RS.90,00,000/-, UPH ELD AS PEAK INVESTMENT SUPRA, INTEREST @ 24% WORKS OUT TO BE RS .21,60,000/-. 30% OF THIS I.E. RS.6,48,000/- IS CONSIDERED TO BE COVERE D IN THE PEAK INVESTMENT OF ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 20 RS.90,00,000/- AND NECESSARY CREDIT FOR THE SAME WI LL BE ALLOWED IN THE RELIEF TO BE WORKED OUT. 7.4. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, UNEXPLAINED INVES TMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS WAS RIGHTLY WORKED OUT BY THE LD. CIT(A) A S UNDER: PEAK OF INVESTMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS UPHELD SUPRA RS.90,00,000/- LESS: INVESTMENT COVERED BY SUNDRY DEBTORS SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2002 RS. 9,50,20 0/- INTEREST EARNED DURING FY RELEVANT TO AT UNDER CONSIDERATION TAKEN AS REINVESTED IN PEAK AS HELD S UPRA RS. 6,48,000/- RS.15,98,200/- BALANCE: RS.74,01,800/- LESS: AMOUNT SHOWN OUTSTANDING IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2003 RS.8,92,450/- UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS RS.65,0 9,350/-. 7.5. ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WHO HAS RIGHTLY ALLOWED THE RELIEF OF RS.42,31,135/- AN D HAS RIGHTLY SUSTAINED THE ADDITION OF RS.65,09,350/-. 8. FURTHER, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE OR DER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH REGARD TO ALLOWING A RELIEF OF RS.6,11,904/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND SUSTENANCE OF INTEREST ASSESSABLE AT RS.21,80,000/- WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS REASONED O NE AND REQUIRES NO INTERFERENCE. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY AS REGARDS TO T HE ADDITION OF THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST, AS THE SAME IS ALSO INCLUDED IN THE AD DITION ON ACCOUNT OF PEAK INVESTMENT IN PAWNING BUSINESS. NECESSARY RELIEF FO R THE CLAIMED DOUBLE ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 21 ADDITION HAS ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED FROM THE ADDITIO N UPHELD ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT SUPRA. THE AMOUNT OF PEAK I NVESTMENT HAS ALSO BEEN DECIDED ABOVE AT RS.90,00,000/-. THUS, THE AMO UNT OF INTEREST ASSESSABLE @ 24% ON AMOUNT OF RS.90,00,000/- COMES TO RS.21,80,000/- AS AGAINST RS.27,91,904/- ASSESSED BY THE A.O. ACCORD INGLY, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS FOUND TO BE REASONED ONE AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. THUS, ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.71(ASR)/2012 AND THAT OF THE REVENUE IN ITA NO.89(ASR)/2012 ARE DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31ST MARCH, 2014. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31ST MARCH, 2014 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SH. MADAN LAL PROP. MADAN DI HATTI BAT ALA. 2. THE ITO WARD 2(3), BATALA. 3. THE CIT(A), ASR. 4. THE CIT, ASR. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR