Shri Raj Bholabhai Patel, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,CC-1(4), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 199/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8305 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 25-07-2012
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K GUPTA
• Keywords: Business income; Search and seizure; Non compliance; Onus to prove
• Section: 142(1); 153A; 132; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM AND SHRI KUL BH ARAT, JM) IT(SS)A NO.25, 26, 27, 28 AND 29/AHD/2010 A.Y.: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-0 6 PATEL AVENUE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., PATEL AVENUE, NR. GURU GOVIND DHAM, GURUDWARA, THALTEJ, AHMEDABAD P. A. NO. AAAAP 9544 M VS THE A. C. I. T., CENT. CIR-1(4), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS)A NO.199, 200,201, 202 AND 203/AHD/2009 A.Y.: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-0 6 RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL, 119 C, SUNRISE PARK, OPP. DRIVE-IN-CINEMA, NR. HIMALAYA MALL, BODAKDEV, AHMEDABAD 380054 P. A. NO. AAYPP 0206 D VS THE A. C. I. T., CENT. CIR-1(4), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI PRITESH SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. K. GUPTA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 25-07-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03-08-2012 O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY: ALL THESE APPEALS FILED BY TWO DIFFERENT ASSESSES, BEING INTER-CONNECTED WITH EACH OTHER AND ON SIMILAR ISSUE, WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND THE SAME ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 2 IT (SS) A NO.25, 26, 27, 28 AND 29/AHD/2010 [ASSESSEES (PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD .) APPEALS FOR A.Y.: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-0 6] 2. THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE VIZ. PAT EL AVENUE CO- OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. AGGRIEVED BY DIFFERENT ORD ERS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)-I/CC.1(4)/579/2008-09, CIT(A)- I/CC.1(4)/580/2008-09, CIT(A)-I/CC.1(4)/581/2008-09 , CIT(A)- I/CC.1(4)/582/2008-09 AND CIT(A)-I/CC.1(4)/583/2008 -09 ALL DATED 03-11-2009 PASSED U/S 144 READ WITH SECTION 153A OF THE IT ACT CONFIRMING VARIOUS ADDITIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED AO BEING ESTIMATED PROFIT, FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003 -04, 2004-05 AND 2005-06. 3. SINCE, ALL THE APPEALS IN THIS CASE ARE ON IDENT ICAL FACTS AND ISSUE, EXCEPT DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONS , WE FIRST TAKE UP THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN IT (SS) A NO.25/A/2010 FOR AY 2001-02 FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION AND DISPOSAL OF ALL THESE APPEALS. 4. THE SOLE GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR AY 200 1-02 IS REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW: THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACT ION OF THE AO OF MAKING ADDITION OF RS.1,78,40,482/- BEING EST IMATED PROFIT FROM PATEL AVENUE PROJECT WHICH IS REQUESTED TO BE QUASHED. 5. BRIEF FACTS: - THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE CO NSTRUCTION BUSINESS. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION WAS CONDUCTED IN THE NEPTUNE GROUP CASES AS WELL AS AT THE SITE OFFICE OF PATEL AVENUE COOPERATIVE IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 3 HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. U/S 132 OF THE ACT ON 01-11-20 06. SEARCH WARRANT WAS ISSUED FOR THE BUSINESS PREMISES AT 205 , AROHI COMPLEX, NR. GANESH PLAZA, OPP. NAVRANGPURA BUS STATION. THE REAFTER, NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 30-01-2008. THE A SSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH ANY RETURN OF INCOME IN RESPONSE TO THE ABO VE NOTICE. FRESH PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A OF THE ACT WERE INITIATED VIDE NOTICE DATED 12-12-2008. ACCORDINGLY, NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE A CT WAS ALSO ISSUED. IN COMPLIANCE THERETO, THE ASSESSEE FILED COPY OF THE BALANCE SHEET ALONG WITH PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT VIDE ITS LE TTER DATED 15-12-2008, BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME STATING THAT INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT T AXABLE. THE LEARNED AO BASED ON THE DOCUMENTS I.E. PAGE 174 OF ANNEXURE A-5 SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF BHOLABHAI V. PATEL COM PUTED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.1,78,40,480/- AND INI TIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS BY OBSERVING IN PARA 4 OF THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER AS UNDER: 4. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION AT THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF SHRI BHOLABHAI V. PATEL, BUNGALOW NO.3, MALO, PANDURANG SOCIETY, JUDGES BUNGALOW ROAD, AHMEDABAD CERTAIN, DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE FOUND. SHRI BHOLABHAI V. PATEL IS THE MAIN PERSON WHO IS HANDLING THE AFFAIRS OF THE SOCIETY ALONG WITH SHERI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL. ACCORDINGLY, VIDE NOTICE DATED 26.12.2008 ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO REFER TO PAGE NO. 17 4 OF ANNEXURE A- 5 SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF SHRI BHOLABHAI V. PATEL, THE COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS ALSO ENCLOSED ALONG WITH THE NOTICE. AS PER THIS DOCUMENT, THE TOTAL SALES REALIZATION C OMES TO RS.13,30,68,200/- AS AGAINST, THE COST OF THE PROJE CT AT RS.5,65,32,455/-RESULTING INTO A SURPLUS OF RS.7,65 ,35,745/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHETHER IT HAS SHOWN THIS PROFIT IN THE RETURNS OF INCOME AND PAID THE TAXES IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 4 THEREON. IT. WAS SUBSEQUENTLY POINTED OUT THAT IN C ASE OF NON COMPLIANCE APPROPRIATE ADDITION WILL BE MADE, ALTHO UGH THIS NOTICE WAS SERVED ON 26.12.2008, NO COMPLIANCE WAS MADE TILL 29.12.2008 BEING THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE FIXED. IN VIEW OF THE NON COMPLIANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL DISC USSION MADE AS ABOVE, SURPLUS OF RS,7,65,35,745/- IS ASSESSED AS INCOME FROM THE PROJECT FOR VARIOUS YEARS IN PROPORTION TO THE RECEIPT IN THE RESPECTIVE YEARS. ACCORDINGLY, YEAR-WISE BREAK UP OF CONSTRUCTION INCOME CONIES TO AS DETAILED BELOW. A. Y. % OF RECEIPTS ASSESSED INCOME (RS.) 2001-02 23.31 1,78,40,482 2002-03 50.83 3,89,03,119 2003-04 15.60 1,19,39,576 2004-05 3.62 27,70,594 2005-06 6.65 50,84,627 PENALTY U/S. 271(L)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1 IS ALSO INITIATED FOR CONCEALMENT, OF INCOME AS NO RETURN O F INCOME HAS BEEN FILED. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, T OTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS COMPUTED, AS UNDER. TOTAL INCOME RS, 1,78,40,482/- ROUNDED OFF TO RS. 1,78,40,480/-. 6. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LEARN ED CIT(A). THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOLLOWING HIS DECISION TAKEN IN THE IDENTICAL CASE OF RAJ BHOLABHAI FOR AY 2001-02 RELYING ON THE DECI SION OF THE HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KERALA LIQ UOR CORPORATION VS CIT, 222 ITR 333, CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,78,40,480/- MADE BY THE LEARNED AO, ON PROTECTIVE BASIS. FINDI NGS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN PARA 6 AND 7 OF HIS ORDER ARE REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW: IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 5 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELL ANT. I FIND THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLA NT HAS NOT CO-OPERATED WITH THE DEPARTMENT. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS AND IT SENT THE LAST REPLY BY RPAD AT THE FAG END O THE TIME BARRING PERIOD. IT IS ALSO N OTICED THAT IDENTICAL ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT OF A. Y.2001-02 IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL. THESE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN CONFIRME D BY ME VIDE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26.10.2009. IN THE APPEL LATE ORDER RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, TH IS ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED AS UNDER:- 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLA NT. I FIND THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT CO-OPERATED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND IT HAD FAILED TO FURNISH THE RELEVANT INFORMATION, WHICH WAS REQUIRED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSM ENT. IN VIEW OF SUCH NON-COOPERATIVE ATTITUDE OF THE APP ELLANT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS FORCED TO PASS THE ASSESS MENT ORDER U/S 153A R. W. S. 144 OF THE I. T. ACT. 6.1 IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AT PAGE 174 OF ANNEXURE A-5 WAS SEIZED FROM THE RESIDE NTIAL PREMISES OF THE APPELLANT. THEREFORE, U/S 132 (4A) OF THE I. T. ACT, THESE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PRESUMED TO BE BELONGING TO THE PERSON FROM WHOM THEY ARE SEIZED A ND CONTENTS OF THESE DOCUMENTS SHALL ALSO BE PRESUMED TO BE TRUE. THIS VIEW HAS ALSO BEEN UPHELD BY THE KERA LA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KERALA LIQUOR CORPORATION VS. CIT (222 ITR 333). THE PRESUMPTION U/S. 132 (4A) OF THE I. T. ACT IS REBUTTABLE. HOWEVER, IN THE PRESENT CA SE, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT ATTENDED AND COOPERATED AT THE TI ME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE APPELLANT HAS TO EXPLAI NED AND CLARIFIED THE CONTENTS OF THE DOCUMENTS IN QUES TION AT ANY STAGE OF ASSESSMENT, THOUGH THE DOCUMENT WAS RECOVERED FROM HIS RESIDENTIAL PREMISES. THE APPELL ANT HAS NOT TENDERED ANY EXPLANATION, WHICH HAS THE EFF ECT OF SHIFTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF OF SUCH REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION. IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 6 6.2 IN ITS SUBMISSION, REPRODUCED ABOVE, THE APPELL ANT HAS STATED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS HELPED HIS FRIEND S, WHO ARE RESIDING AT U.S.A. HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS TH AT THE PROFIT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION OF PATEL AVENUE PROJEC T HAS NOT BEEN OFFERED TO TAX BY ANY ENTITY. IN OTHER WOR DS, THE SURPLUS OF RS. 7,65,35,745/- FROM PATEL AVENUE PROJ ECT HAS NOT BEEN OFFERED TO TAX EITHER BY THE APPELLANT HIMSELF FOR HIS SO CALLED FRIENDS, WHO ARE REPORTED TO BE S AYING IN U.S.A. IN FACT, APPELLANT IS STILL HIDING MORE FACT S, THAN WHAT HAS BEEN DISCLOSED. 6.3 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE ADDITION O F RS.1,78,40,480/- IS CONSIDERED JUSTIFIED AND SAME I S CONFIRMED. 7. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL. TH E DOCUMENT IN QUESTION WAS DISCOVERED FROM THE PREMISES OF SHR I RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL AND SHRI BHOLABHAI V. PATEL. THE AD DITIONS MADE IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL HAVE A LREADY BEEN CONFIRMED BY APPELLATE ORDER DATED 28-10-2009. THEREFORE, IT IS DIRECTED THAT SIMILAR ADDITIONS MA DE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT I.E. PATEL AVENUE HOUSING CO-OP. S OCIETY LTD., SHOULD BE MADE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS TILL THE ISSUE I S FINALLY RESOLVED BY THE HIGHER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES. 7. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US AGGRIEVED OF THIS ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 8. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ADDI TION NEEDS TO BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF 15 LANDOWNERS WHO WERE THE ACTUAL BENEFICIARIES. THE LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THA T IF THE BENCH DOES NOT FIND IT TO BE APPROPRIATE, THEN THE ADDITI ON MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON PROTECTIVE BASIS MAY BE CONFIRME D ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS AND THE ADDITION MADE IN THE HANDS OF SHRI RA J BHOLABHAI PATEL MAY BE DELETED. FURTHER, THE LEARNED AR PRAYED THAT IF THE BENCH IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 7 FINDS IT APPROPRIATE TO REMIT BACK THE CASE, BOTH T HE CASES OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL MAY BE SENT B ACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED AO. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED DR SUPPO RTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND PRAYED THAT IF ALL THE CA SES NEED TO BE REMITTED BACK PERTAINING TO BOTH THE ASSESSEES, THE N THE SAME MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 9. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PER USED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. BOTH THE ASSESSEES VIZ. PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. AND SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL H AD NOT COOPERATED BEFORE THE REVENUE ON EITHER OCCASION TO DETERMINE THEIR TAX LIABILITY. FROM THE SEIZED MATERIALS OBTAINED B Y THE REVENUE IT IS EVIDENT THAT ONE OF THE PARTIES I.E. ASSESSEE OR SH RI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL HAVE TO BE TAXED. HOWEVER, BOTH THE ASSESSEES HAD ELUDED FROM THE EYES OF THE REVENUE DELIBERATELY IN ORDER TO FRUSTRATE THE REVENUE TO ASCERTAIN THEIR TAX LIABILITY. IT IS PER TINENT TO MENTION THAT THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FOR BOTH THE ASSESSEES ARE SAME. WE ARE ALSO SURPRISED BY THE ARGUMENT OF THE LEARNED AR TH AT IF THE BENCH DECIDES NOT TO TAX THE ABOVE STATED ADDITIONS IN T HE HANDS OF FIFTEEN LANDOWNERS, THEN THE ADDITIONS MAY BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF M/S. PATEL AVENUE CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS AND DELETE THE ADDITIONS IN THE H ANDS OF SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL WITHOUT BRINGING BEFORE US ANY CONVINCING EVIDENCE OR MATERIALS FOR ARRIVING AT SUCH CONCLUSI ON. ON ONE HAND, THE TAX LIABILITY POINTS TOWARDS THE ASSESSEE VIZ. M/S. PATEL AVENUE CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. WHICH IS A CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 8 INVOLVING MANY MEMBERS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MR. BIPIN CHINUBHAI PATEL AND SECRETARY MR. HEMANT BASRAMBHAI PATEL AND ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL WHO APPEAR S TO HAVE SUBSTANTIAL INFLUENCE AND WON THE TRUST OF THE SOCI ETY. THE LEARNED AR ALSO VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE ACTUAL BENEFICIARIE S OF THE TRANSACTIONS ARE THE FIFTEEN LANDOWNERS AND THESE A DDITIONS ARE TO BE MADE IN THEIR HANDS. THE ASSESSEE M/S. PATEL AVENUE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. BEING A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY RE GISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING MANY MEMBERS IS LEFT TO BE MANAGED UNDER THE GUIDANCE AND CONTROL BY TWO INDIVIDUAL VI Z. THE CHAIRMAN AND THE SECRETARY OF THE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIET Y LTD. AND THEY SEEMS TO HAVE CLOSE NEXUS WITH SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI P ATEL. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE FACTS HAVE TO BE ANALYZED IN DET AIL IN ORDER TO IDENTIFY THE CORRECT ASSESSEE ON WHOM THE ADDITION HAS TO BE SUSTAINED. FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE VIZ. PA TEL AVENUE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND SECRETARY AND SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL, IT IS APPAR ENT THAT BOTH OF THEM HAVE NOT COOPERATED EITHER DURING THE ASSESSME NT STAGE OR BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. HOWEVER, NOW, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ASSURED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESSEE AND THEIR COUNSELS SHALL COOPERATE WITH THE REVENUE AND FURNISH THE REQUIRED MATERIALS TO ASSIST THE REVENUE IN ASSESSI NG THE ADDITION ON THE APPROPRIATE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THIS SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED A R, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE REMIT BACK THE ENTIRE MA TTER TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO SHALL HEAR THE MATTER AFR ESH AND PASS IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 9 APPROPRIATE ORDER ON MERITS AFTER OBTAINING REMAND REPORT FROM THE LEARNED AO. THE LEARNED CIT(A) MAY ALSO SUMMON THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST IF REQUIRED OR KEEP T HEM INTIMATED OF THE PROCEEDINGS SO THAT THEY ARE NOT L EFT IN THE LURCH AND APPROPRIATE JUSTICE CAN BE DELIVERED, KEEPING I N VIEW OF THE FACT THAT IF THE ADDITIONS ARE SUSTAINED IN THE HAN DS OF THE ASSESSEE VIZ. PATEL AVENUE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOC IETY LTD., THERE WOULD BE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MEMBE RS OF THE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY OR THE DIRECTORS OF THE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY. THE ASSESSEE TRUST REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND SECRETARY ARE ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERA TE WITH THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REVENUE FOR SPEEDY DISPOSAL OF T HE PROCEEDINGS. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 10. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. IT (SS) A NO.199, 200,201, 202 AND 203/AHD/2009 [ASSESSEES (RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL) APPEAL - FOR A.Y.: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 20 05-06] 11. THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, RAJ BH OLBHAI PATEL AGGRIEVED BY DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) -I, AHMEDABAD PASSED IN APPEAL NO.CIT(A)-I/CC.1(4)/388/2008-09, C IT(A)- I/CC.1(4)/389/2008-09, CIT(A)-I/CC.1(4)/390/2008-09 , CIT(A)- I/CC.1(4)/391/2008-09 AND CIT(A)-I/CC.1(4)/392/2008 -09 ALL DATED 26-10-2009 PASSED U/S 153A READ WITH SECTION 144 OF THE IT ACT FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-0 5 AND 2005-06 IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 10 CONFIRMING VARIOUS ADDITIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED AO BEING ESTIMATED PROFIT EARNED FROM PATEL AVENUE PROJECT. 12. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES SUBMITT ED THAT THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THAT IN THE CA SE OF PATEL AVENUE CO-OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., AND PRAYED THAT THE DE CISION TAKEN IN THAT CASE WILL DETERMINE THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE A SSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE. 13. SINCE, WE HAVE SET ASIDE THE CASE OF M/S. PATEL AVENUE COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. BACK TO THE FILE O F THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE CASE AFRESH, AND BOTH THE A SSESSEES CASES BEING INTER-RELATED AND INTER-LINKED WITH IDENTICAL FACTS, WE HEREBY REMIT THESE CASES ALSO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEAR NED CIT(A) WITH SIMILAR DIRECTION TO THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND THE ASS ESSEE. 14. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, SHRI RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL IN IT (SS) A NO.199, 200,201, 202 AND 203/AHD /2009 FOR A.Y.: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 AND 2005-06 ARE ALSO ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. IT (SS) A NO.25 TO 29/A/2010 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-0 6) PATEL AVENUE CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD IT (SS) A 199 TO 203/A/09 (AY: 2001-02 TO 2005-06) RAJ BHOLABHAI PATEL VS ACIT CC 1(4), AHMEDABAD 11 15. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF BOTH THE ASSE SSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT ) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTNT MEMBER LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/ 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 DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: DIRECT DICTATION 27-7-12 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 03-08-12 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: 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: