Shri Methew C.Abraham, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-4, Surat

ITSSA 107/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1473 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAGDISH
• Assessee Lawyers: KETAN H SHAH
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Business income; Salary income; Document seized; Principle of natural justice; Fair market value; Valuation report
• Section: 143(3); 50C; 153A; 132; 15

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JM, & MANISH BORAD, A M. IT(SS)A NO.107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR: 2005-06 SHRI MATHEW C. ABRAHAM, C/O KETAN H. SHAH, ADVOCATE, 903, SAPHIRE COMPLEX, C.G. ROAD, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD VS ASSTT. CIT, CC-4, SURAT APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN : ABKPC2065L APPELLANT BY SHRI KETAN H. SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI JAGDISH, CIT, DR DATE OF HEARING: 21/10/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05/01/2016 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF CIT(A)-II, AHMEDABAD DATED 01/11/2011 IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-II/CC- 4/45/2010-11 FOR ASST. YEAR 2005-06. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 153A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1 961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) BY ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, SURAT ON 31.03.2010 . 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A SEAR CH ACTION WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSE SSEE IN CONNECTION WITH RIVAA GROUP ON 20/01/2009. THEREAFTER THE CASE WAS CENTRALIZED VIDE ORDER U/S 127(2) OF THE ACT AND NOTICE U/S 153 A OF THE ACT WAS IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 2 ISSUED ON 27.07.2009 IN RESPONSE TO WHICH ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 29.9.2009 SHOWING INCOME OF RS.1,20,13 6/- FROM SALARY AND OTHER SOURCES. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTI NY ASSESSMENT U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT AND INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT R S.7,26,136/- AND ONLY ONE ADDITION OF RS.6,06,000/- WAS MADE ON ACCO UNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69B OF THE ACT FOR INVES TMENT IN RESIDENTIAL FLAT. IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132 (4) OF THE ACT, ASSESSEE SURRENDERED RS.2,00,000/- VOLUNTARILY TOWA RDS INVESTMENT IN PURCHASING OF FLAT AND CERTAIN EXPENSES FOR THE RENOVATION. BUT THIS SURRENDER OF RS.2,00,000/- WAS NOT SHOWN IN THE RET URN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN PURSUANCE TO NOTICE U/S 15 3A OF THE ACT AND, THEREFORE, THE SURRENDER MADE WAS DEEMED TO BE RETR ACTED. 3. THE REASON FOR ADDITION OF RS.6,06,000/- U/S 69B FOR UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE RESIDENTIAL FLAT HAS ARISEN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE W HERE VALUATION REPORT DATED 5.1.2005 ISSUED BY GOVT. APPROVED VALU ER WAS FOUND PERTAINING TO FLAT NO.402 VAISHNAVI APARTMENTS, CI TY LIGHT AREA, SURAT, SHOWING VALUE OF THE FLAT AT RS.9,67,000. AL SO DURING SEARCH, REGISTERED SALE DEED OF THIS FLAT WAS FOUND SHOWING PURCHASE CONSIDERATION PAID AT RS.3,61,000/- AND THE STAMP D UTY PAID AT RS.40,270/- TOTALING TO RS.4,01,270 /- WHEREAS AS P ER JANTRI RATE SUB- REGISTRAR HAS VALUED THE FLAT AT RS.4,79,400/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE FAIR MARKET VALUE O F THE FLAT IS RS.9,67,000/- AND AFTER REDUCING THE PURCHASE CONSI DERATION SHOWN IN THE SALE DEED AT RS.3,61,000/- THE DIFFERENCE CALCU LATED AT IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 3 RS.6,06,000/- WAS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE RESIDENTIAL FLAT. 4. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CI T(A) WHO PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY RESTRICTING THE ADDITI ON TO RS.3,49,970/- AND OBSERVED AS UNDER :- 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND THE ARGUM ENTS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT AND ALSO CAREFULLY GONE T HROUGH, THE ORDER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE THE ADDITION ON THE BASI S OF DIFFERENCE OF VALUATION OF FLAT NO.402, VAISHNAVI APPRTS., CITY L IGHT AREA, SURAT DONE BY SHRT MAHENDRA P. GOYAL, CHARTERED ENGINEER AND REGI STERED VALUER ON 4.1.2005 IN WHICH THE VALUE OF FLAT (1156 SQ.FT.) A LONG WITH FIXED FURNITURE IS DONE AT RS.9,67,OOOA AND SAFE DEED DTD. 25.1.2005 F OR THE SAME FLAT WAS REGISTERED AT RS,3,61,000/-. THE CASE TAWS RELIED U PON BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT AS MENTIONED IN PARA 4.4 OF THIS ORDER ARE MAINLY RELATED TO THE VALUATION REPORT OF THE DVO WHEREAS IN THE PRES ENT CASE, THE VALUATION WAS NOT DONE BY THE DVO ON REFERENCE FROM THE ASSES SING OFFICER BUT THE VALUATION OF THE FLAT WAS GOT DONE BY THE APPELLANT HIMSELF BEFORE THE PURCHASE OF THE FLAT. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE SALE D EED WAS FOUND TO BE REGISTERED BY WAY OF PAYING ADDITIONAL STAMP DUTY OF RS.40,270 /-ON THE VALUE OF FLAT AS PER JANTRI RATE ADOPTED BY SUB REGISTRAR AT RS.4,70 ,400/-. ON PERUSAL OF THE STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT RECORDED U/S. 132(4) OF THE ACT, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE APPELLANT HIMSELF HAS MADE DISCLOSURE OF RS.2,00,00 0/- ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT IN 'FLAT AND ITS RENOVATION. IN ANSWER T O QUESTION NO.35, HE HAS CLEARLY ADMITTED THAT HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO EXPLA IN SATISFACTORILY THE DISCREPANCY IN PAYMENT MADE FOR PURCHASING THE FLAT AND RENOVATION OF THE SAME. IN REPLY TO Q.NO.19 & 20, THE APPELLANT SUBMI TTED THAT THE VALUATION OF FLAT WAS MERELY OBTAINED FOR OBTAINING THE BANK LOA N AND ALSO TO COVER THE COST OF RENOVATION OF THE FLAT AND THE VALUER HAD VALUED THE FLAT ALONG WITH FURNITURE AND FIXTURE AND HE PAID RS.2,00,000/- FOR FURNITURE AND FIXTURE TO THE SELLER OF THE FLAT IN CASH. OTHER THAN THE CASH PAYMENT OF RS .2,00,000/-, NO PAYMENT IN. CASH WAS MADE TO THE SELLER. IN REPLY TO G.NOS.20 & 21, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE FROM HIS SAVINGS AND FROM HIS WI FE'S SAVINGS AND ALSO FROM LOAN TAKEN FROM THE RELATIVES AND FRIENDS. HE PROMISED TO SUBMIT THE DETAILS LATER ON BECAUSE THE DETAILS WERE NOT READI LY AVAILABLE. THE APPELLANT WAS ALSO SHOWN PAGE NO.7 TO 26 WHICH IS SALE DEED O F THE FLAT WHEREIN THE SUB REGISTRAR ADOPTED JANTRI RATE OF RS.4,79,400/- AS AGAINST THE PURCHASE PRICE OF RS.3,61,000/- FOR THE STAMP DUTY PURPOSE. THE VALUATION OF THE FLAT WAS GOT DONE BY THE APPELLANT FROM THE REGISTERED V ALUER IN THE MONTH OF IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 4 JANUARY,2005 PRIOR TO THE DATE OF REGISTRATION OF S ALE DEED. THE APPELLANT HAD ADMITTED UNACCOUNTED CASH PAYMENT OF RS.2,00,000/- FOR PURCHASE OF FLAT AND RENOVATION IN FURNITURE AND FIXTURE. THE APPELLANT HAS NEVER RETRACTED FROM THE STATEMENT OF ADMISSION OF UNACCOUNTED PAYMENT OF RS .2,00,000/- EITHER BEFORE THE ADIT, ASSESSING OFFICER OR ANY OF THE HI GHER AUTHORITIES. ALTHOUGH THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF STATEM ENT RECORDED U/S.132(4) THAT THE VALUATION OF FLAT WAS GOT DONE FOR OBTAINI NG LOAN FROM BANK BUT ON PERUSAL OF THE AMOUNT OF LOAN GRANTED, IT IS FOUND THAT THE LOAN OF RS.4,00,000/- WAS OBTAINED FROM THE BANK AS AGAINST VALUATION OF RS.9,67,000/- WHICH COME TO 40% OF THE VALUE OF THE FLAT. NORMALLY, THE BANK GRANTS 85% OF THE VALUE OF PROPERTY TO THE BORROWER AND IT IS CLEAR FROM THE VALUATION REPORT THAT THE FLAT WAS ONLY 3 % YEARS OLD. DURING THE COURSE OF THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE DETAILS OF INCOME, INVES TMENT AND TAX PAYMENT AND WITHDRAWAL FROM BANK WERE CALLED FOR AND IT IS FOUN D THAT THE APPELLANT WAS HAVING INCOME FROM SALARY ONLY AND THE DETAILS OF I NCOME AND WITHDRAWALS ARE AS UNDER: A.Y. GROSS INCOME DECLARED INV. FOR TAX SAVI TAX PAYMENT BALANCE WITHDRAWAL HOUSEHOLD EXPER 2001-02 RS.1,10.400/- RS.19,304/- RS.91,096/- RS.60,000/- 2002-03 RS.1,10,400/- RS.28,834/- RS.81,566/- RS.60,000/- 2003-04 RS.1,10,400/-; RS.24.373/- RS.85,527/- RS.60,000/- 2004-05 RS.1 ,36,0007- RS.46,509/- RS.89,491/- RS,60,000/- 2005-06 RS.1, 59,0007- RS.65,963/- RS.93,037/- RS.60,000/- IT IS CLEAR FROM THE COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT AND C APITAL ACCOUNT THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NO CASH WITHDRAWAL FOR PAYMENT OF CAS H OF RS.2,00,000/- TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN FURNITURE AND F IXTURE WHICH WAS DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF STATEMENT REC ORDED U/S.132(4) OF THE I.T. ACT. AS PROMISED IN STATEMENT U/S.132(4) OF THE I.T. ACT, THE APPELLANT NEVER FILED ANY EVIDENCE OR PROOF TO OBTAIN LOAN FROM FRI ENDS AND RELATIVES OR SAVINGS OF WIFE TO EXPLAIN SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN FLAT/FUR NITURE, AND FIXTURES, THE DETAILS WERE NEVER FILED BEFORE THE ADIT OR ASSESSING \ OFFICER OR DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. IT WAS ADMITTED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL TOE \ THE APPELLANT (AS PER ORDER SHEET DTD. 21.09.2011) THAT THE DISCLOSURE STATEMEN T OF RS.2,00,000/- WAS NEVER RETRACTED IN WRITING BEFORE THE ADIT, ASSESSING OFFICER OF ANY HIGHER AUTHORITIES AND THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN FURNITURE AND FIXTURE OF RS.2,00,000/- WAS NOT EXPLAINED BEFORE T HE ASSESSING OFFICER. EVEN IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 5 THE APPELLANT HAS NOT SHOWN THE (PURCHASE VALUE OF FIAT AT JANTRI RATE OF RS.4,79,400/-. CONSIDERING THE JANTRI RATE OF FLAT, INVESTMENT IN FURNITURE AND FIXTURE AND STAMP DUTY, THE MINIMUM INVESTMENT WOUL D BE AS UNDER: VALUE-OF FLAT AS PER JANTRI-RATE ADOPTED- BY REGISTRAR FOR STAMP DUTY PURPOSES. RS.4,79,400/- ADD: 1} CASH PAYMENT FOR FURNITURE & FIXTURES AS ADMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. RS.2,00,000/- 2) STAMP DUTY RS.40,2 70/- + RS.30300/- RS. 70.570/- RS.7.49 .970/- AGAINST THIS AMOUNT, THE APPELLANT COULD EXPLAIN TH E SOURCE OF PAYMENT OF RS.4,00,000/-BEING LOAN TAKEN FROM CANARA BANK. FOR THE BALANCE PAYMENT, THE APPELLANT COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVES TMENT IN FLAT, FURNITURE AND FIXTURE AND THE RENOVATION ETC. SO, EVEN IF IT IS A CCEPTED THAT THE HIGHER VALUATION OF FLAT .WAS GOT DONE FOR OBTAINING BANK LOAN AND JANTRI RATE IS ACCEPTED AS CORRECT INVESTMENT ALONG WITH UNDISCLOS ED PAYMENT OF RS.2,00,000/- ADMITTED BY THE APPELLANT, THE UNACCO UNTED INVESTMENT COMES TO RS.3,49,970/- FOR WHICH THE APPELLANT COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE AND IN .FACT, CONSIDERING THE GROSS INCOME DECLARED, WITHD RAWAL FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AND INVESTMENT AND TAX PAYMENT, THERE REMA INS NO ACCOUNTED INCOME FOR INVESTMENT IN FLAT AND FURNITURE AND FIX TURES. 5.1 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, OUT OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AN ADDITION OF RS.,3,49,970/- BEING UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN FLAT AND RENOVATION-THERE OF ALONG WITH THE FURNITURE AND FIXTURE U/S.69B OF THE I.T. ACT, IS CONFIRMS AN D THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.2,56,030/- IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. THE APPELL ANT GETS RELIEF OF 2,56,030/- 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT VALUATION REPORT BY TH E REGISTERED VALUER AS DISCUSSED ABOVE IS NOT RELEVANT BECAUSE I T WAS GOT PREPARED FOR GETTING HOUSING LOAN AND ON THE BASIS OF THIS REPORT HE IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 6 WAS ABLE TO GET A LOAN OF RS.4 LACS ONLY AND IF THE VALUE OF FLAT HAD BEEN RS.9,67,000/- THEN THE BANK WOULD HAVE GIVEN H IM HIGHER AMOUNT OF LOAN, WHICH WAS NOT THE CASE AND ASSESSEE RECEIVED RS.4,00,000/- AS HOUSING LOAN. LD. AR FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT RS.2,00,000/- SURRENDERED DURING THE COURSE OF GIVI NG STATEMENT U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE RETURN O F INCOME FOR THE VERY REASON THAT AT THE TIME OF PREPARATION OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR ARRIVING AT THE CORRECT INCOME ASSESSEE ARRIVED AR A CONCLUSION THAT HE HAD ALL THE NECESSARY SUPPORTING AND EVIDEN CES ALONG WITH SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN THE RESIDENTIAL FLAT AS WEL L AS FURNITURE AND FIXTURES WITH BILLS AND VOUCHERS FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE FLAT AND DUE TO THIS REASON RS.2,00,000/- WAS NOT SHOWN IN THE R ETURN OF INCOME IN PURSUANCE TO NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT. FURTHER LD . AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT MADE ON THE BASIS OF ANY MATERIAL UNEARTHED DURING THE SEARCH P ROCEEDINGS AND NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE ON RECORD WAS FOUND BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER TO PROVE THAT ASSESSEE HAS PAID ANY SUM OVE R AND ABOVE THAN THAT SPECIFIED IN THE AGREEMENT TO THE VENDOR. LD. AR ALSO REFERRED TO THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE AT PAGE 33 OF THE PAPER BOOK EXHIBITING INVESTMENT IN RESIDENTIAL FLAT AT RS.3,9 7,650/- AND INVESTMENT IN FURNITURE AND FIXTURES AND HOUSEHOLD ASSETS IN THIS FLAT AT RS.1,76,128/- WHICH MAKES A TOTAL OF RS.5,73,778 /-.AND ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT AS THERE IS NO UNDISCLOSED INVESTMEN T THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY LD. CIT(A) AT RS.3,49,970/- SHOULD BE DELETED. 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSE E HAS MADE STATEMENT ON OATH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT DURING SEAR CH PROCEEDINGS IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 7 AND HE HAS NOT RETRACTED THE STATEMENT AND FURTHER SUFFICIENT EVIDENCES WERE UNEARTHED BY THE SEARCH TEAM BY WAY OF SEIZURE OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO VALUATION OF THE FLAT AS WELL AS SALE-DEED OF THE FLAT AND THERE WAS CLEARLY VARIATION IN BETWEEN THE VALUATION AS PER THE VALUERS REPORT AND AMOUNT PAID AS PURCHASE CON SIDERATION BY THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER VALUATION TAKEN BY SUB-REGISTR AR WAS A DIFFERENT FIGURE. LD. DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HIMS ELF WAS HAVING A CERTAINTY IN HIS MIND THAT THERE IS SOME ELEMENT OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN THE FLAT AND FOR THIS REASON SURRENDE RED RS.2 LACS AND THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT INCLUDING BALANCE SHEET AND CASH BOOK, 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE REVOLVES ROUND THE MATTER SO A S TO ARRIVE AT THE CORRECT VALUE OF INVESTMENT IN THE RESIDENTIAL FLAT PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE IN A SITUATION WHEN DURING SEARCH OPERATIO N VARIOUS DOCUMENTS DEPICTED DIFFERENT VALUE OF THE RESIDENTI AL FLAT WERE FOUND AND STATEMENT ON OATH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT WAS MAD E BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SURRENDER OF RS.2 LACS AS UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN THE FLAT. AS PER THE DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING SEARCH OPER ATION THE VALUATION OF FLAT AS PER REGISTERED VALUER REPORT W AS SHOWN AT RS.9,67,000/-, AND PURCHASE CONSIDERATION INCLUDING STAMP DUTY AS PER REGISTERED SALE DEED PAID BY THE ASSESSEE FOR P URCHASE OF FLAT WAS RS.4,01,270/-, WHEREAS VALUATION MADE BY SUB-RE GISTRAR FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECTION OF STAMP DUTY AS PER SALE DEE D WAS SHOWN AT RS.4,79,400/-. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT VALUATION R EPORT SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS A BASIS FOR VALUING THE FLAT BECAUSE TH IS VALUATION WAS NOT IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 8 INITIATED AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSING OFFICER RATH ER IT WAS TAKEN UP BY THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF FOR GETTING BETTER BANK LOAN A ND THE REPORT WAS SPECIFICALLY MADE FOR GETTING BANK LOAN FROM CANARA BANK AND FINALLY ASSESSEE RECEIVED RS.4 LACS HOUSING LOAN ON THIS PR OPERTY. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THERE HAS BEEN INVESTMENT IN THE FURNITURE, FIXTURES AND OTHE R HOUSEHOLD GOODS IN THE FLAT AND THE INVESTMENT IN THE FURNITURE, FI XTURES AND HOUSEHOLD GOODS HAS BEEN MADE AT RS.1,76,128/-. 9. LD. CIT(A) IN ORDER TO ACCEPT THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT INVESTMENT IN FURNITURE, FIXTURES ETC. AT RS.2 LACS HAS BEEN SOURCED FROM THE PREVIOUS YEARS SAVINGS HAD MADE SP ECIFIC FINDING THAT ASSESSEE IS ONLY EARNING INCOME FROM SALARY AN D THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS BELOW RS.1,00,000/- IN THE PAST 5 ASSESSMENT YEARS AND EVEN MINIMUM WITHDRAWAL OF RS.5,000/- PER MONTH TAKEN THEN ALSO ASSESSEE WILL NOT BE FOR SUFFICIENT FUNDS TO PURCHASE FURNITURE, FIXTURES & OTHER HOUSEHOLD GOODS. 10. IN OUR VIEW, THE ASSESSEE WHO IS NOT HAVING ANY BUSINESS INCOME AND IS ONLY EARNING INCOME FROM SALARY AND I NTEREST IS NOT REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED DETAILS OF CASH BOOK LEDGER, BALANCE SHEE T AND PURCHASE BILLS AND SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE INVESTMENTS MADE I N RESIDENTIAL FLAT ARE HAVING PROPER SOURCE IN THE FORM OF ACCUMULATED CAP ITAL BALANCE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR PAST FEW YEARS AS WELL AS HOUSING LOAN FROM CANARA BANK. WE ARE FURTHER OF THE VIEW THAT VALUATION REP ORT CANNOT BE TAKEN AS AN EVIDENCE FOR ARRIVING AT VALUATION OF THE RES IDENTIAL FLAT AS IT WAS IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 9 DATED BEFORE THE DATE OF PURCHASE/SALE DEED. AS IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE RECORD AVAILABLE AND THE VALUATION REPORT BY TH E REGISTERED VALUER IS DATED 4 TH JANUARY, 2005 WHEREAS THE SALE DEED IS DATED 25.1. 2005. CERTAINLY SECTION 50C OF THE ACT REFERS TO THE VALU E ADOPTED OR ASSESSED BY ANY AUTHORITY OF STATE GOVERNMENT FOR T HE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY AND LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY TA KEN THE VALUE AS PER JANTRI RATE AT RS.4,79,400/-. 11. THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS THAT THE INCOME SURR ENDERED AT RS.2 LACS DURING THE STATEMENT GIVEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN ANY COGNIZANCE AS THE SAME HAS BEEN GIVEN ON OATH AND HAS NOT BEEN RETRACTED IN A REASONABLE TIME. ALSO T HE FACT REMAINS THAT ASSESSEE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO SUPPORT THE OPENIN G CAPITAL BALANCE OF RS.6,52,730/- SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND NOR HAS BEEN ABLE TO SUBMIT FINANCI AL STATEMENT OF PREVIOUS YEARS TO DEPICT THAT HOW ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO ARRIVE AT THIS CAPITAL OF RS.6,52,730/-. 12. HOWEVER, WE AGREE TO THE VALUE OF THE RESIDENTI AL FLAT AT RS.7,49,970/- ARRIVE AT BY THE LD. CIT(A) BUT WE DI FFER ON THE DEDUCTION WHICH HAS BEEN RESTRICTED BY LD. CIT(A) TO RS.4,00, 000/- AS RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE AS HOUSING LOAN BECAUSE SOME ELEMENT OF SAVINGS OF PREVIOUS YEARS CANNOT BE ELIMINATED AND IN THE INTE REST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE THINK THAT ASSESSEE CERTAINLY SHOULD HA VE POSSESSED ITS OWN FUND AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE SURRENDER MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WE SUSTAIN THE ADDITION TO RS.2,00,000/- AND THUS ASSE SSEE WILL GET RELIEF OF RS.1,49,970/-. IT(SS)A NO. 107/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR2005-06 10 13. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH JANUARY, 2016 SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 05/01/2016 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 19/12/12/2015 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 23/12/2015 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: __________ 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 05/01/2016 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: