THE DCIT-CENTRAL (1), Bhopal V. Shri Rajendra Singh Nayak, Jhabua

ITSSA 167/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3998 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 03-02-2020
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 07-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S MANTRI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Fair market value
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

P A GE 1 | 12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE S/SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH NAYAK, RENUE COLONY, MEGHNAGAR, JHABUA (M.P) VS. DCIT, CENTRAL_1, BHOPAL PAN/GIR NO.ADDPN 9696 F (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 DCIT, CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL VS. SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH NAY AK, RENUE COLONY, MEGHNAGAR, JHABUA (M.P) PAN/GIR NO.ADDPN 9696 F (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : S/SHRI SUMIT NEMA, SR. ADV/PIYUSH P ARASHAR/GAGAN TIWARI REVENUE BY : SHRI S.S.MANTRI, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 29 /7/ 2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29/9/2021 O R D E R PER BENCH IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 2-13 IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24 .5.2019 OF THE LD CIT(A)-3, BHOPAL AND IT(SS) A NO.167/IND/201 9 FOR THE IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 2 | 12 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGA INST THE ORDER DATED 24.5.2019 OF THE LD CIT(A)-3, BHOPAL. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPEAL HAS RAISED THE FOLLOW ING GROUNDS: 1. THAT THERE IS NO JURISDICTION EITHER IN LAW OR ON FACTS FOR THE LD CIT(A) TO SUSTAIN THE UNDISCLOSED EXPENS ES, ADMITTED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSIO N TO THE TUNE OF RS.18,49,342/- SINCE THE SOURCE OF THES E EXPENSES IN THE FORM OF ADDITIONAL INCOME HAS ALREA DY BEEN OFFERED FOR TAX BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION. 2. THAT THE RECEIPTS AND EXPENSES ACCOUNT FILED BEF ORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) AND AO CLEARLY SHOWED THE INFLOW AND OUTFLOW OF FUNDS WITH OUT ANY DEFICIT AND THUS ONCE THE INCOME IS ALREADY TAXED T HEN THEE REMAINS NO JUSTIFICATION OF TAXING THE EXPENSES. T HUS THE ADDITION OF RS.18,49,342/- DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 3. LD SR. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT T HE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION ON BOTH THE INCOME SHOWN IN THE S ETTLEMENT APPLICATION AS WELL AS THE APPLICATION OF THE SAID INCOME, WHIC H IS NOT SUSTAINABLE EITHER ON FACTS OR IN LAW. LD SR. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF EXPENSES QUA UNDISCLOSED INCOME MEN TIONED IN THE SETTLEMENT APPLICATION BUT SUSTAINED THE IMPUGNED A DDITION OF EXPENSES WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE TELESCOPING OF REGULAR INCO ME DISCLOSED IN THE REGULAR RETURN. LD SR. COUNSEL ELABORATED THAT DUR ING THE PENDENCY OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED SETT LEMENT APPLICATION U/S.245C BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ON 24.2.2 015 OFFERING ADDITIONAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.22,37,582/- AL ONGWITH REGULAR INCOME OF RS.21,71,209/- FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 A ND ALSO SHOWN IN ITS IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 3 | 12 APPLICATION. LD SR COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ALONG SE TTLEMENT APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE ALSO ATTACHED THE SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL TRA NSACTION, COPY OF WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT PAGE 2 OF APB. LD SR COUNSEL ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IN ITS COMPUTATION OF INCOME, HAS SHOWN RS .21,79,029/-, WHICH WAS EARNED THROUGH JCB INCOME AND TRACTOR INCOME, C OPY OF COMPUTATION OF INCOME HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED IN PAPER BOOK AT PAGE 3 3, WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT JCB INCOME OF RS.12,70,715/- AND TRACTOR INCOM E OF RS.8,87,665/-. LD SR. COUNSEL ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE RECEIPTS AND EXPENSES ACCOUNT FILED BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND BEFORE THE ASS ESSING OFFICER, CLEARLY SHOWED THE INFLOW AND OUTFLOW FUNDS, WHEREAS THE IN COME INCLUDING OF REGULAR INCOME IS ALREADY TAXED THEN THERE REMAINS NO JUSTIFICATION OF TAXING THE EXPENSES. LD ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS R ELEVANT PARA 6.6 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED EXPENSES/INVESTMENTS BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND PAID TAX THEREON, THEN NO FURTHER ADDITION IS REQUI RED TO BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. REPLYING TO ABOVE, LD CIT DR DREW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS PAGE 21 OF PAPER BOOK ALONGWITH PAGE 62 OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER, THE LAST OPERATING PARA 6.6 . LD CIT DR SUBMITTED THAT AS PER PAGE 21 OF A PB, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN TOTAL INCOME OF RS.43,95,963/- FROM COMMISSIO N INCOME OF JCB AND TRACTOR RENT OUT OF WHICH RS.21,58,381/- WAS ALREAD Y SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME AND THERE IS NO DISPUTE IN THIS REGARD. LD CIT DR IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 4 | 12 FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT OUT OF SAID NET INCOME, TH E INCOME SHOWN IN THE RETURN WAS DEDUCTED AND THE AMOUNT OF RS.22,37,582 /- WAS DECLARED BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND THE LD CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE SAME AS PER TABLE SHOWN AT PAGE 62 OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER , LD CIT DR VEHEMENTLY POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED EXPENSES /INVESTMENTS BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AMOUNTING TO RS.40,84,924 /- OUT OF WHICH RS.22,35,582/- WAS DECLARED AND OFFERED TO TAX BEFO RE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION BUT REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.18,49,342/- W AS NEVER OFFERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE DESPITE ADMITTING BEFORE THE SE TTLEMENT COMMISSION, THEREFORE, THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WERE RIGHT IN MAKI NG AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION IN THIS REGARD. LD CIT DR PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) BE CONFIRMED. 5. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSION S, FIRST OF ALL, WE MAY POINT OUT SOME UNDISPUTED FACTS VIZ (I) THE ASSESSE E EARNED NET INCOME OF RS.43,95,963/- FROM JCB INCOME AND TRACTOR RENT, OU T OF WHICH RS.21,58,381/- WAS OFFERED TO TAX IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.22,37,582/- WAS DECLARED AND OFFERED T O TAX BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION. AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS ALS O AMPLE CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED EXPENSES/INVESTMENTS OF RS.40,.84 ,924/- BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION INCLUDING OF SAID AMOUNT OF R S.22,35,582/- I.E. REMAINING AMOUNT OF NET INCOME EARNED BY HIM FROM C OMMISSION INCOME OF JCB AND TRACTOR RENT INCOME. IN THIS REGARD, WE AR E OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 5 | 12 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED PART INCOME IN THE R EGULAR RETURN AND PART INCOME BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND HAS PAI D TAX ON BOTH THE PARTS OF INCOME FROM SAID INCOME FROM JCB AND TRACT OR RENT. HOWEVER, FROM THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY LD SR. COUNSEL ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE UNABLE TO SEE ANY TENABLE EXPLANATION REGARD ING THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.18,49,342/-, WHICH ADMITTED BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION BUT NEVER OFFERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE . WE MAY ALSO POINT OUT THAT ALSO THAT IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL PARAGRAPH 1.2, THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF AS ADMITTED THI S FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS.22, 37,582/- ALONGWITH REGULAR INCOME SHOWN IN THE RETURN FOR A.Y. 2012-13 OF RS.21,79,029/-. WE ARE UNABLE TO SEE ANY EXPLANATION REGARDING TABL E REPRODUCED BY THE LD CIT(A) AT PAGE 62 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WHEREIN, T HE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED AMOUNT OF RS.22,35,852/- FOR TAXATION BEFOR E THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OUT OF ADMITTED EXPENSES/INVESTMENTS OF RS.40,84,924/- BUT THERE IS NO EXPLANATION REGARDING REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.18,49,342/- HOW AND WHEN IT WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION. THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON VARIOUS ORDERS INCLUDING ORDER OF ITAT PUNE IN THE CASE OF NARESH T WADHWANI VS DCIT (2014) 54 TAXMANN.COM 360 AND SUBMITTED THAT W HERE QUANTUM OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN COURS E OF SEARCH AS ADDITIONAL INCOME WAS MORE THAN ADDITION MADE BY TH E AO ON ACCOUNT OF PEAK NEGATIVE BALANCE IN IMPUGNED CASH BOOK, IF AFO RESAID ADDITION WAS IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 6 | 12 SUSTAINED IN ADDITION TO UNDISCLOSED INCOME ALREADY DECLARED, IT WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. 6. SINCE, WE ARE UNABLE TO SEE ANY VIVID AND CLEAR POSITION FROM THE RECORDS, DOCUMENTS AND ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BEFORE US , AS TO WHETHER, THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION BY THE ASS ESSEE EITHER BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OR BEFORE THE AO DURING T HE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR A.Y. 2012-13 AND THE LD REPRESENTAT IVES OF BOTH SIDES COULD NOT SPECIFICALLY ASSIST US TO POINT OUT THE CLEAR F ACTUAL POSITION, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE FIND IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO VERIFY AND EXAMINE AS TO WHETHER THE I MPUGNED AMOUNT WAS INCLUDED AND OFFERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE EITHER BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OR BEFORE THE AO DURING THE RELEVANT PRO CEEDINGS KEEPING IN VIEW THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE IN THE CASE OF NARESH T WADHWANI(SUPRA), INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE FROM JCB AND TRACTOR R ENT AND OTHER FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE. ACCORDINGLY , GROUND NO.1 & 2 OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1.ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.19,08,550/- MA DE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH FOUND. IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 7 | 12 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.57,99,583/- MA DE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN JEWELLERY. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.30,540/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,55,000/- MAD E BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUN TS. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.21,02,500/- MA DE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF ON-MONEY PAID FOR PURCHASE OF LAND. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,00,00,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION O F SHOPPING COMPLEX. 9. APROPOS GROUND NO.1 OF APPEAL, WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT IS OBSERVED THAT BEFORE THE LD CI T(A), THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED CASH ACCOUNT DETAILS WHICH INDICATE THAT ON T HE DATE OF SEARCH I.E. ON 20.6.2012, THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING AVAILABLE CASH O F RS.18,48,736/- REFLECTED IN CASH BOOK. WHEN THESE FACTS WERE BROU GHT TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF LD CIT DR CONCEDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING CAS H BALANCE IN HIS HAND. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A), WHICH IS HEREBY CONFIRMED AND GROUND NO.1 OF APPEAL OF RE VENUE IS REJECTED. 10. APROPOS GROUND NO.2, WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SU BMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD OF THE CASE. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.57,99,583/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT JEWELLERY VALUED AT RS.11,25,4 20/- WAS PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH IS ALREADY REFLECTED IN THE BOO KS OF ACCOUNT. PURCHASE IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 8 | 12 OF JEWELLERY AGGREGATING TO RS.32,40,175/- RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 WAS DISCLOSED IN SOF SUBMITTED BEFORE THE S ETTLEMENT COMMISSION. HENCE, AN AMOUNT OF RS.44,97,466/- WAS ALREADY DISC LOSED BY THE ASSESSEE. REGARDING BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.13,02,117/-, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE FATHER AND MOTHER, BOTH HAVE CONFIRMED IN THEIR AFF IDAVIT BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT AND SAME WAS ACCEPTED BY THE HONBLE HIG H COURT CONSIDERING THE CBDT CIRCULAR. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS RELIED ON VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS THAT IN VIEW OF CBDT CIRCUL AR, GOLD ORNAMENTS BELONGING TO FAMILY MEMBERS HAS TO BE ALLOWED. HEN CE, THE JEWELLERY DECLARED BY THE PARENTS OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITHIN T HE PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF CBDT CIRCULAR. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, THE LD CIT(A ) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. BEFORE US ALSO, LD CIT DR COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY SPECIFIC DEFECTS RECORDED BY THE LD CIT(A) IN THE I MPUGNED ORDER. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME AND GROUND NO.2 OF RE VENUE IS DISMISSED. 11. APROPOS GROUND NO.3, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.30,540/- ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME TREATING THE SAME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE HAS DIS CLOSED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE HAS V ARIOUS LAND AND CULTIVATED CROPS. HENCE, THE LD CIT(A) AFTER CONSI DERING THE VARIOUS FACTS, LAND, EQUIPMENTS FOR CULTIVATING THE LAND, DELETED THE ADDITION. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN HIS ORDER TO INTERFERE WITH. GROUND NO.3 IS THEREFORE, DISMISSED. IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 9 | 12 12. WITH REGARD TO GROUND NO.4, WE OBSERVE THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.3,55,000/- MADE BY THE AO IS NOT BASED ON ANY IN CRIMINATING DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH BUT ONLY ARISING OUT OF REGULAR BANK ACCOUNT DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESS EE BEFORE THE SEARCH. THE ENTIRE INCOME DISCLOSED IN REGULAR RETURNS HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUFFICIENT CASH B ALANCE IN HIS HAND AND SAME HAS BEEN SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE LD CIT(A) IS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. HENCE, WE CONFIRM THE SAME. GROUND NO.4 IS REJECTED. 13. APROPOS GROUND NO.5 OF APPEAL, WE HAVE HEARD TH E RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITIO N OF RS.21,02,500/- ON ACCOUNT OF ON-MONEY PAID FOR PURCHASE OF LAND. BEF ORE THE AO, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED REGISTERED SALE DEED, WHICH COUL D CERTIFY THE VALUATION OF LAND BY THE LAND VALUATION AUTHORITY. THE AO CANNO T TAKE HIS OWN VIEW TO ADOPT THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF LAND WITHOUT ANY BAS IS. IT IS THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NO ON-MONEY WAS GIVEN TO THE S ELLER OF THE LAND. THERE SHOULD BE SOME BASIS OR PLAUSIBLE MATERIALS O N RECORD TO PROVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN ON-MONEY TO THE SELLER. IN T HE ABSENCE OF SAME, THE LD CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO OF RS.21,02,500/-. HENCE, THIS GROUND OF REVENUE IS REJECTED. 14. GROUND NO.6 RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS.1,00,00,0 00/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION OF SHOPPING COMPLEX. WE FIND THAT IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 10 | 12 THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.1,00,00,000/- ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT OF SHRI AMAR SINGH NAYAK, WHO OPINED THAT THE SHOPPING COMPLEX COST WOULD BE AROUND RS.90 LAKHS TO RS.1 CRORE. HOWEVER, THE EXPENDITURE OF SUCH CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AT RS.71,62,072/- AS ON 31.3.2013. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO DECLARED BEFOR E THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OF RS.27,96,778/- TOWARDS CONSTRUCTION O F COMPLEX, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION OF RS.56,79,794/ - IN A.Y. 2013-14. DECLARED BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION. SINCE T HE AMOUNT DECLARED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND SETTLEMENT COMMISSION COME S TO RS.99,58,850/-, WHICH IS ALMOST SIMILAR TO THE ESTIMATE BY THE AO, THE LD CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION. WHEN THIS FACT WAS CONFRONTED TO LD CIT DR, HE CONCEDES THE FACT. HENCE, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) AND REJECT GROUND NO.6 OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 15. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED U/R 34(4) OF I.T.RULES, 1963 ON 2 9 /9/2021. SD/- SD/- ( MANISH BORAD) (CHABNDRA MOHAN GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER INDORE ; DATED 29 /9/2021 B.K.PARIDA, SPS (OS) IT(SS)A NO.193/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 IT(SS)A NO.167/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-2014 P A GE 11 | 12 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER SR.PVT.SECRETARY ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT/ASSESSEE : SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH NAYAK, RENUE COLONY, MEGHNAGAR, JHABUA (M.P) 2. THE REVENUE: DCIT, CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL 3. THE CIT(A)-,3, BHOPAL 4. PR.CIT- , BHOPAL 5. DR, ITAT, INDORE 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//