The DCIT Central-2, Vidisha V. M/s. Alankar Jewellwer, Vidisha

ITSSA 205/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6754 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 18-03-2021
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S.S. MANTRI; INDEXI GENERAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Gift; Loose papers; Document seized; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Valuation report; Retraction; Documents seized; TDS; Set aside
• Section: 32; 69; 132; 10; 69C; 143(3); 153A; 69B; 201; 139(1); 64; 44AB; 43; 48; 13; 153; 22; 20

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE RAJPAL YADAV HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING ITA NO.838/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2016-17 M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLERS NIKASHA ROAD, VIDISHA VIDISHA / VS. AC IT - II BHOPAL (APPELLANT) (RE SPONDENT ) P.A. NO. AAVFA1527D IT(SS)A NO.205/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2016-17 ACIT - II BHOPAL / VS. M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLERS NIKASHA ROAD, VIDISHA VIDISHA (APPELLANT) (RE SPONDENT ) P.A. NO. AAVFA1527D APPELLANT BY SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE, AR RE SPONDENT BY SHRI S.S. MANTRI, CIT - DR DATE OF HEARING: 08.06.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01.09.2021 / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD: ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 2 THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS AT THE INSTANCE OF ASS ESSEE AND REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-3, (IN SHORT CIT(A)), BHOPAL DATED 2 7.06.2019 ARISING OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE AC T DATED 26.12.2017 FRAMED BY ACIT-II BHOPAL. 2. BRIEF FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE RECORDS ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ENGAGED IN JEWELLERY BUSINESS. THE FIRM WAS INCORPORATED ON 01.04.2011. SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE A CT WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE AND ITS PARTNER ON 21 ST AUGUST 2015. THE ASSESSEES SHOP IS SITUATED AT THE GROUND FLOOR AND THE RESIDENCE OF PARTNERS AND THEIR FAMILY IS SITUATED ON THE UPPER FLOORS. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH VARIOUS LOOSE PAPERS AN D DOCUMENTS WERE SEIZED. DECLARATION OF INCOME UNDER VARIOUS HEADS W AS MADE BY THE PARTNERS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM IN THE STAT EMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) PLACED AT PG.74-126 OF PB-I. IT WAS SUBMITTE D BY THE PARTNER THAT THE CASH BALANCES ARE SHOWN BY PENCIL, HOWEVER , IN THE COMPUTER DATA THE EXACT CASH BALANCE ARE RECORDED. IT WAS FU RTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE ESTIMATE THE CASH BALANCE IS AROUN D 42 TO 45 LAKHS. IN THE STATEMENT SHRI SANJAY JAIN SURRENDERED THE ADDI TIONAL INCOME OF ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 3 RS. 1,60,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOOSE PAPERS IN HIS HANDS AND IN THE HANDS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY AND THE FIRM. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT PERSON WISE, CONCERN WISE AND YEAR WISE DETAIL S WOULD BE SUBMITTED SUBSEQUENTLY. THUS, THE INCOME DECLARED I N THE STATEMENT U/S 132(4) WAS VAGUE AND GENERAL IN NATURE AND WAS ON A ROUGH ESTIMATE BASIS. THE INCOME WAS SUBSEQUENTLY QUANTIF IED ON THE BASIS OF SEIZED RECORDS AND THE INCOME WAS OFFERED TO TAX IN THE RESPECTIVE HANDS. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME REGU LARLY. BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE AUDITED U/S 44AB OF THE ACT. NOTICES U/ S 153A OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED FOR A.Y. 2012-13 TO 2015-16. INSTANT AP PEAL RELATES TO A.Y. 2016-17 SINCE THE DATE OF SEARCH WAS 21.08.2015. TH E REGULAR RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2016-17 WAS FILED SUBSEQUENT TO THE SEARCH ON 02.10.2016 WHICH WAS IN INCOMPLIANCE TO NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT. INCOME OF RS. 3,10,52,680/- WAS DECLARED WHICH INCL UDED THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OFFERED AT RS.3,03,10,439/-. DETA ILED SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS REPLY WAS FILED TO THE INFORMATION CALLED BY THE LD. AO ON TH E BASIS OF THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS AND THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PRODUCED. LD . AO WAS NOT ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 4 SATISFIED WITH THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND MADE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS ASSESSING THE INCOME OF RS. 9,7 7,86,975/-:- INCOME SHOWN IN THE RETURN RS.3,10,52,680/ - ADD: UNDISCLOSED STOCK OF JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH U/S 69B RS.4,18,16,751/ - ADD: UNDISCLOSED LOAN IN PAWNING BUSINESS RS.18,84,500/ - ADD: UNDISCLOSED LOANS IN MONEYLENDING AS PER DIARY BS-4 RS.3,07,500/ - ADD: UNEXPLAINED CASH FOUND DURING THE COUSE OF SEARCH RS.60,00,000/ - ADD: UNDISCLOSED LOANS IN MONEY LENDING AS PER DIARY BS- 44 PAGE 11 RS.2,25,544/ - ADD: INCOME OF FERED IN STATEMENT U/S 132(4) NOT OFFERED TO TAX IN RETURN OF INCOME RS.1,60,00,000/ - ADD: UNEXPLAINED TRANSACTIONS AS PER LPS-1 SEIZED FROM STATION ROAD, VIDISHA RS.5,00,000/ - ASSESSED TOTAL INCOME RS.9,77,86,975/ - 4. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE TH E LD. CIT(A) AND PARTLY SUCCEEDED. NOW BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE ARE IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 5. WE WILL FIRST TAKE UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITANO . 383/IND/2019 WHEREIN SOLE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT OF THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE THE LD. CIT(A) III, BHOPAL WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,60,00,000/- MADE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 5 SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT RECORDED UNDER SEC TION 132(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, BEING THE AMOUNT DECLARED BY ONE OF THE P ARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE, BUT NOT SHOWN IN THE RETURN FILED. 6. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED REFERRING TO THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:- ADDITION IN RESPECT OF DECLARATION MADE OF RS. 1,60 ,00,000 UNDER SECTION 132(4) THE LD.A.O. HAS MADE THE ADDITION SOLELY ON THE BAS IS OF DECLARATION MADE BY THE PARTNER MR . SANJAY JAIN. THIS ADDITION IS NOT BASED ON ANY IRR EGULARITY OR ANY INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH BUT IS MADE ON THE BASIS OF DECLARATION MADE U/S 132(4) BY SHRI SANJAY JAIN. THE DECLARATION IS MADE IN REPLY TO QUESTION 54 OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED ON 22.08.2015 IN WHICH THE PARTNER HAS STATED (ENGLISH VERSION) THAT: I HAVE SEEN THE VARIOUS PAPERS OBTAINED IN THE SEA RCH PROCEEDINGS AT VARIOUS PREMISES. KEEPING IN MIND THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES O F MY FIRM AND FAMILY AND THE FACTS HAVE DISCUSSED WITH THEM. KEEPING IN MIND ALL INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS AND ISSUES, I ON BEHALF OF MYSELF, FAMILY MEMBERS AND THE FIRM IN ADDITION TO THE AMOUNT MENTIONED HEREIN ABOVE, ACCE PT RS. 1,60,00,000/- AS ADDITIONAL UNDECLARED INCOME. YEAR WISE AND CONCERN WISE BIFURCATION OF THIS RS.1,60,00,000/- WILL BE SUBMITTED BY ME TO THE IN COME TAX DEPARTMENT AFTER SOME TIME THUS THE DECLARATION IS MADE IN A CONSOLIDATED MANN ER FOR THE ENTIRE GROUP WITHOUT MENTION OF ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR OR TO THE CO NCERN IN WHICH CASE IT IS BEING MADE. THE DECLARATION IS NOT MADE SPECIFICALL Y IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. THE LD. A.O. HAS MADE THE ADDITION SOLELY ON THE BA SIS OF THE DECLARATION MADE U/S 132(4). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS UPHELD THE ADDITION RELYING ON T HE EVIDENCE ACT REMARKING THAT THE STATEMENT MADE DURING THE COURSE OF THE SE ARCH IS BINDING AND AS SUCH THE ADDITION IS PROPERLY MADE BY THE LD. A.O. ARGUMENTS IT IS SUBMITTED THAT NO ADDITION WAS WARRANTED AS T HE SURRENDER HAS NOT BEEN MADE WITH REFERENCE TO ANY LOOSE PAPER SEIZED DURIN G THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND WAS ACCORDINGLY NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 132(4). THE AO HAS FAILED TO BRING ON RECORD ANY SPECIFIC I NSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE HAVING EARNED ANY UNDISCLOSED INCOME OR HAVING MADE ANY UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT WHICH COULD JUSTIFY THE ADDITION UNDER R EFERENCE. THE SOLE BASIS FOR MAKING THE ADDITION IS THE STATEMENT MADE BY ONE OF THE PARTNERS. THE LD. A.O. HAS MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS FOR THE DOCUMENTS F OUND AND THE INVESTMENTS MADE (STOCK +CASH). THUS ALL THE LOOSE PAPERS AND THE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 6 INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE A.O. AND AC CORDINGLY HE HAS MADE THE ADDITIONS UNDER VARIOUS HEADS. AFTER MAKING THE ADDITIONS ON THE BASIS OF VARIOUS PAPERS THERE REMAINS NO SCOPE FOR MAKING TH E ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF DECLARATION. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO SPECIFIC DECLARATIO N WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM AND IT WAS A JOINT DECLARATION IN THE HAND S OF VARIOUS PERSONS. NO ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS MENTIONED IN THE DECLARATION MA DE AND THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD TO PRESUME IT TO BE BELONGING TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE ADDITI ONS SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ARE BAD IN LAW. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MAD E WITHOUT FINDING ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL MERELY ON THE BASIS OF THE D ECLARATION. IN THIS CONNECTION THE ATTENTION IS DRAWN TO THE DIRECT JUD GMENT OF THE HONBLE INDORE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI SUDIP MAHESHWARI IN IT A 524/IND/2013 PRONOUNCED ON 13/02/2019 AND IN THE CASE OF M/S ULT IMATE BUILDERS IN ITA 134/2019 PRONOUNCES ON 09/08/2019. THE HONBLE TRIB UNAL HAS RELIED ON THE VARIOUS JUDGMENTS OF THE VARIOUS HIGH COURTS SP ECIALLY THE DECISION OF THE HON. JHARKHAND HIGH COURT IN SHRI GANESH TRADING CO . V/S. CIT AND THE DECISION OF HON. GUJRAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF K AILASHBEN MANGARLAL CHOKSI V/S. CIT. IN VIEW OF THIS, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THE ADDIT ION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 7. PER CONTRA LD. DR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED RELYING ON T HE DETAILED FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) AND ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.1,60,00,000/- IN THE STATE MENT RECORDED ON OATH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT AND THIS SURRENDER WAS M ADE FOR VARIOUS DISCREPANCIES AND INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURI NG THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 8. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE DECISIONS REFERRED AND RELIED ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 7 BY LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE HAD MAINLY CONTENDED THAT THE ALLEGED ADDITION OF RS.1. 60 CR. IS MADE BY LD. AO ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WITHOUT REFERRING TO ANY INCRIMINATING/SE IZED MATERIAL. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT FOR VA RIOUS LOOSE PAPERS AND INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME AND THE LD. AO HAS ALSO MADE SEPARATE ADDITIONS UNDER VARIOUS HEADS PE RTAINING TO STOCK, CASH, PAWNING AND MONEYLENDING BUSINESS. 9. WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT LD. AO HAD MADE VARIOUS OTHER ADDITIONS BASED ON THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS APART FROM THE ADDITION MADE FOR SURREND ERED OF RS.1.60 CR. MADE U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT. ON PERUSAL OF THE A SSESSMENT ORDER WE FIND THAT THE LD. AO WHILE MAKING THE IMPUGNED ADDI TION HAS OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS: 13.1 DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, SHRI SANJAY JAIN OFFERED UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.1,60,00,000/- IN THE STATEMENT RECORDE D U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS DISCREPANCIES AND INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE HANDS OF M/S ALANKAR JE WELLERS. 13.2 HOWEVER, IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED FOR A.Y . 2016-17, UNDISCLOSED INCOME OFFERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AMOUNTIN G TO RS.160,00,000/- HAS NOT BEEN OFFERED TO TAX IN RETURN OF INCOME. 13.3 THEREFORE, RS.1,60,00,000/- IS ADDED TO TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS DISCLOSED IN STATEMENT U/S 132(4) DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 8 10. THE ABOVE OBSERVATION OF THE LD. AO CLEARLY SPE LLS OUT THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.1,60,00,000/- IS PURELY BASED ON THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT AND THERE IS NO REFE RENCE TO ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL TO SUPPORT SUCH ADDITION. TH IS FACT IS NOT DISPUTED BY THE LD. DR ALSO. IT IS ALSO NOT DISPUTE D THAT THE LD. AO HAS DEALT WITH ALL THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS AND INCRIMI NATING MATERIAL AND HAS ALSO MADE ADDITIONS UNDER VARIOUS HEADS INC LUDING THE UNACCOUNTED STOCK OF JEWELLERY, UNDISCLOSED LOAN AN D PAWNING BUSINESS, UNDISCLOSED INCOME FROM MONEYLENDING BUSI NESS AS PER SEIZED DIARY BS-4, AND UNEXPLAINED TRANSACTION AS P ER LSP-1. SO IT REMAINS AN UNCONTROVERTED FACT THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.1,60,00,000/- IN CHALLENGE BEFORE US IS PURELY BASED ON THE STATE MENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT. 11. SIMILAR FACTS AND THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE INST ANT APPEAL CAME UP FOR ADJUDICATION BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE O F SIGNATURE BUILDERS VS. ACIT IN ITANO.184 TO 186/IND/2018 AND OTHERS DA TED 08.01.2021 WHEREIN THIS TRIBUNAL APART FROM REFERRING VARIOUS OTHER JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS HAD ALSO REFERRED TO OTHER DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL ADJUDICATING SIMILAR ISSUE AND IDENTICAL FACTS IN T HE CASE OF SUDEEP MAHESHWARI IN ITANO. 524/IND/2013 DATED 13.02.2019 AND M/S. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 9 ULTIMATE BUILDERS VS. ACIT IN ITANO.134/IND/2019 D ATED 09.08.2019. RELEVANT FINDING OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF SIGNAT URE BUILDERS (SUPRA) EXTRACTED BELOW:- 25. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE DECISIONS RELIED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THROUGH GROUND NO.3 RAISED FOR AS SESSMENT YEARS 2013- 14 & 2014-15 ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.25,00,000/- AND RS.3,00,00,000/- MADE BY THE LD. AO FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013-14 & 2014-15 RESPECTIVELY FOR THE AMOUNT DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT CONT ENDING THAT THE SAME IS WITHOUT CORROBORATING WITH ANY INCRIMINATING MATERI AL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 26. WE OBSERVE THAT THE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED ON SIG NATURE GROUP INCLUDING THE ASSESSEE ON 29.1.2014. CERTAIN LOOSE PAPERS WERE SEIZED.ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.3,25,00,000/- (RS. 2 5,00,000/- + RS.3,00,00,000/-) WAS OFFERED FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013-14 AND 2014- 15 RESPECTIVELY. HOWEVER IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FI LED POST SEARCH U/S 153 A OF THE ACT SUCH ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.25,00,000/- AND RS.3,00,00,000/- WAS NOT OFFERED IN THE RETURN OF I NCOME. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT VARIOU S LOOSE PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS NARRATED BY THE LD. A.O FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH DOES NOT PERTAIN TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THERE WAS NO SUC H INCRIMINATING MATERIAL RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH RELATING TO THE ADDITION IN QUESTION THE ALLEGED ADDITION WAS MADE PURELY ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT. 27. WE ALSO OBSERVE THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY THERE IS NO MENTION OF AN Y INCRIMINATING MATERIAL HAVING ITS NEXUS WITH THE ALLEGED INCOME DECLARED U /S 132(4) OF THE ACT.THE LD. A.O HAS FAILED TO PROVE ON RECORD ANY S PECIFIC INSTANCE WITH SUPPORT OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH COULD SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED THE ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT VARIOUS OTHER ADDITIONS H AVE BEEN MADE BY THE LD. A.O FOR THE UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT U/S 69B, UNDISCL OSED INVESTMENT IN PROJECTS OF LAND AND UNEXPLAINED UNSECURED LOAN AS WELL AS UNEXPLAINED CASH U/S 69 A OF THE ACT . HOWEVER SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS.25,00,000/- AND RS.3,00,00,000/- MADE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013-14 AND 2014-15 THE SAME IS PURELY BASED ON THE STATEMENT GIVEN ON ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 10 OATH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT BY THE AUTHORISED REPRES ENTATIVE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS COLLECTIVELY SURRENDERED AS ADDI TIONAL INCOME ON BEHALF OF VARIOUS GROUP CONCERNS. BUT WITHOUT THE S UPPORT OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL ON WHICH THE REVENUE AUTHORI TIES WERE ABLE TO LAY THEIR HANDS, THIS ADDITION TOTALLING TO RS.3.25 CR ORES (RS.25,00,000/- + RS.3,00,00,000/-) IS BASED ONLY ON THE STATEMENT GI VEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT. 28. NOW THE MOOT QUESTION REMAINS THAT 'WHETHER THE LD. A.O WAS JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION PURELY ON THE BASI S OF STATEMENT GIVEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT WITHOUT PROVING ON RECORD ANY COR ROBORATIVE EVIDENCE OR INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF S EARCH WHICH COULD HAVE DIRECT NEXUS WITH THE ALLEGED ADDITION OF RS.3.25 C RORES'. 29. WE OBSERVE THAT SIMILAR ISSUE CAME UP BEFORE TH IS TRIBUNAL IN ANOTHER GROUP CONCERN M/S ULTIMATE BUILDERS V/S ACIT ITA NO .134/IND/2019 ORDER DATED 09.08.2019. M/S ULTIMATE BUILDERS WAS A LSO SUBJECTED TO SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE ACT ON 29.1.2014 BEING PART O F THE SAME SIGNATURE GROUP. FROM PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. CI T(A) IN THE CASE OF M/S SIGNATURE BUILDERS OBSERVED AT PAGE 64 & 65, LD.CIT (A) HAS GIVEN THE BRIEF DETAILS OF THE ADDITIONAL INCOME ADMITTED BY THE AU THORISED PERSON OF M/S SIGNATURE GROUP WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS; S.NO CONCERN/F.Y 2012-13 2013-14 TOTAL 1 SIGNATURE INFRASTRUCTURE 50 300 350 2 SIGNATURE BUILDERS 25 300 325 3 SIGNATURE BUILDERS AND COLONISERS 25 300 325 4 SIGNATURE DEVELOPERS 100 100 TOTAL 1100 5 OM BUILDERS 275 275 6 OM CONSTRUCTION 50 750 7 SAINATH INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD. 25 25 TOTAL 1100 8 ULTIMATE BUILDERS 225 225 9 VIRASHA INFRASTRUCTURE 225 225 450 10 M/S SAINATH COLONIZERS P. LTD. 110 110 11 SHRI ANIL KERED KHILWANI 40 40 ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 11 TOTAL 150 30. FROM THE ABOVE WE FIND THAT IN THE CASE OF M/S ULTIMATE BUILDERS ALSO ADDITIONAL INCOME WAS SURRENDERED IN THE STATEMENT GIVEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT FOR WHICH THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE LD. A.O WITHOUT CORROBORATING IT WITH ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AN D THE ADDITION WAS CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A). WHEN THE MATTER TRAVELLED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL THE ADDITION OF RS.2.25 CRORES WAS DELETED BY THIS TRIB UNAL OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS:- '9. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE JUDGMENTS REFERRE D TO AND RELIED BY BOTH THE PARTIES. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSE E RAISED IN GROUND NO.1 OF THE INSTANT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. C IT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,25,00,000/- MADE BY THE LD. A.O ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME SURRENDERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH BY THE PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. 10. AT THE COST OF REPETITION WE WOULD LIKE TO RECI TE AND RECAPITULATE THE FACTS ONCE MORE. THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ENGAGED IN REAL ESTATE BUSINESS. IT IS THE PART OF SIGNATURE GROUP. SEARCH ACTION WAS INITIATED IN THE SIGNATURE GROUP AND ITS ASSOCIATES ON 29.1.2014 . THE ASSESSEE'S ASSOCIATION WITH THE SIGNATURE GROUP IS ON ACCOUNT OF THE COMMON PARTNERS IN VARIOUS CONCERNS. ASSESSEE IS SEPARATELY ASSESSE D TO TAX. SEARCH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT WAS INITIATED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 29.1.2014 AND WAS CONCLUDED ON 31.1.2014. THIS FACT IS PROVED ON THE BASIS OF 'PANCHANAMA' PREPARED BY THE OFFICER OF THE SEARCH TEAM WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE 62-64. NO SURRENDER WAS MADE IN THE STATEME NTS TAKEN BY THE SEARCH TEAM DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH FROM 29.1.2 014 TO 31.1.2014. THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL R EFERRED BY THE LD. A.O ON THE BASIS OF WHICH ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE. 11. THE SEARCH ACTION IN THE CASE OF SIGNATURE GROU P CONTINUED EVER AFTER 31.1.2014. ON 02.02.2014, MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN WHO IS THE PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM GAVE A STATEMENT BEFORE THE SEARCH TE AM WHEREIN HE MADE SURRENDER OF RS.2,25,00,000/- ON BEHALF OF THE APPE LLANT FIRM AND AGREED TO OFFER IT TO TAX. IN THE VERY SAME STATEMENT HE A LSO MADE SURRENDER ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER FIRM M/S. VIRASHA INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE CAPACITY OF A PARTNER. IN THE VERY SAME STATEMENT HE ALSO MADE SU RRENDER ON BEHALF OF OTHER COMPANIES OF SIGNATURE GROUP. LD. A.O DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS NOT OFFERED SURRENDERED INCOME OF RS.2,25,00,000/- FOR TAX AND CONFRONTED THE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 12 ASSESSEE. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 143 (3) OF THE ACT, ASSESSEE MADE THE RETRACTION BY SUBMITTING THAT NO SUCH UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS EARNED AND THEREFORE NO SUCH INCOME WAS REQUIRED TO BE OFFERED TO TAX. HOWEVER, LD. A.O GIVING REFERENCE T O THE STATEMENT OF MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN, PARTNER OF ULTIMATE BUILDERS AND ALS O GIVING REFERENCE TO THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH AT SIG NATURE GROUP MADE ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOSED INCOME. WHEN THE MATTER CA ME UP BEFORE LD. CIT(A) ADDITION WAS CONFIRMED. HOWEVER THE BASIS OF ADDITION WAS ACCEPTED TO HAVE BEEN MADE ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT OF MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN. NO REFERENCE WAS MADE TO ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL HAVING ITS BEARING ON THE SURRENDERED INCOME. DURING THE COURS E OF HEARING BEFORE US LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH I.E. BETWEEN 29.1.14 TO 31.1.2014 NO CASH OR UNRECO RDED ASSETS WAS FOUND, NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND AND NO I NCOME WAS OFFERED TO TAX IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT OF THE PERSON FOUND TO BE IN THE POSSESSION AND CONTROL OF THE BOOKS OF PR EMISES. RELEVANT QUESTIONS ASKED ABOUT THE LOOSE PAPER FOUND WERE DU LY REPLIED IN THE STATEMENT. 12. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE SEARCH IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS CONCLUDED ON 31.1.2014 THE ALLEGED STATEMENT OF THE PARTNER MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN TAKEN ON 02.02.2014 C ANNOT BE CONSTRUED AS A STATEMENT GIVEN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH U/ S 132(4) OF THE ACT SO FAR AS RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE SINCE THE SEARCH IN ITS CASE ALREADY CONCLUDED ON 31.1.2014. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT N O INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND AS HELD BY HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN THE LATEST DECISION IN THE CASE OF ACIT (1) VS. SUDEEP MAHESHWARI (SUPRA) THAT 'NO ADDITION WAS CALLED FOR WHICH HAS BEEN MADE MERELY ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT WITHOUT CORREL ATING THE DISCLOSURE MADE IN THE STATEMENT WITH THE INCRIMINATING MATERI AL GATHERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH'. 13. SO THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE CAN BE SUMMARISED THAT THE ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE MERELY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT WHICH TOO WAS TAKEN AFTER CONCLUSION OF T HE SEARCH AND NO CORRELATION HAS BEEN MADE WITH THE INCRIMINATING MA TERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 14. ON THE OTHER HAND DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE G AVE REFERENCE TO VARIOUS JUDGEMENTS REFERRED ABOVE. SHE MAINLY PLACE D EMPHASIS ON THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS IN THE CAS E OF KISHORE KUMAR V/S DCIT (SUPRA) HOLDING THAT 'WHEN THERE WAS A CLE AR ADMISSION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN THE STATEMENT SWORN IN U/S 13 2(4) OF THE ACT THERE IS NO NECESSITY TO SCRUTINISE THE DOCUMENTS'. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 13 15. NOW SO FAR AS THE FIRST CONTENTION OF THE ASSES SEE THAT THE STATEMENT RELIED ON BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES CANNOT BE CONS TRUED AS A STATEMENT GIVEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT, WE WILL LIKE TO FIRST REPRODUCE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 132(4) OF THE ACT; '(4) THE AUTHORISED OFFICER MAY, DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH OR SEIZURE, EXAMINE ON OATH ANY PERSON WHO IS FOND TO BE IN POS SESSION OR CONTROL OF ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, DOCUMENTS, MONEY, BULLION, JE WELLERY TO OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING AND ANY STATEMENT MADE BY SUCH PERSON DURING SUCH EXAMINATION MAY THEREAFTER BE USED IN EVIDENCE IN ANY PROCEEDING UNDER THE INDIAN INCOME- TAX ACT, 1922 (11 OF 1922 ), OR UNDER THIS ACT. 1 EXPLANATION.- FOR THE REMOVAL OF DOUBTS, IT IS HE REBY DECLARED THAT THE EXAMINATION OF ANY PERSON UNDER THIS SUB- SECTION M AY BE NOT MERELY IN RESPECT OF ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, OTHER DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS FOUND AS A RESULT OF THE SEARCH, BUT ALSO IN RESPECT OF ALL MA TTERS RELEVANT FOR THE PURPOSES OF ANY INVESTIGATION CONNECTED WITH ANY PR OCEEDING UNDER THE INDIAN INCOME- TAX ACT, 1922 (11 OF 1922 ), OR UNDE R THIS ACT.' 16. THE ABOVE SUB SECTION 4 OF SECTION 132 OF THE A CT STARTS WITH REFERENCE TO 'AUTHORISED OFFICER', WHICH MEANS THAT THE OFFIC ER WHO IS AUTHORISED TO CONDUCT SEARCH ON THE ASSESSEE. IN THE INSTANT CASE IT IS STATED BEFORE US THAT THE AUTHORISED OFFICER OF THE ASSESSEE AND THA T OF THE OTHER CONCERNS OF SIGNATURE GROUP ARE DIFFERENT. 17. AFTER THE WORD THE AUTHORISED OFFICER IT READS 'DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OR SEIZURE, EXAMINATION OF BOTH THE PERSON'. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IS A PERIOD DURING WHICH THE SEARCH IS INITI ATED AND CONCLUDED. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE SEARCH WAS INITIATED ON 29.1.2 014 AND CONCLUDED ON 31.1.2014 BY A AUTHORISED OFFICER FOR THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS VERIFIABLE FROM THE PANCHANAMA FRAMED BY THE SEARCH TEAM. THE STATE MENT OF MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN WAS TAKEN ON 02.02.2014 BY ANOTHER AUTHORIS ED OFFICER AND THIS DATE IS AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE SEARCH IN THE C ASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 30.01.2014. 18. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME FORCE IN THE CONTENTIO N OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES IF THE STATEMENT U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT WAS TAKEN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT THE ASSESSEE'S PREMISES OR DURI NG THE CONTINUATION OF SEARCH, THE STATEMENT MAY HAVE BEEN RECORDED ON OTH ER PLACES BUT THE FACT IS THAT SO FAR AS THE ASSESSEE M/S. ULTIMATE BUILDE RS IS CONCERNED THE SEARCH CONCLUDED ON 31.01.2014 AND BEFORE THE CONCL USION OF THE SEARCH NO SURRENDER OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS MADE IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT BY THE PERSONS AVAILABLE AT T HE ASSESSEE'S BUSINESS PREMISES. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 14 19. AS REGARDS THE STATEMENT OF MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN G IVEN ON 02.02.2014 IS CONCERNED, WE FIND THAT THIS STATEMENT CONTAINS THE SURRENDER FOR VARIOUS GROUP CONCERNS AND NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE ASSESSE E M/S. ULTIMATE BUILDERS. REFERENCE WAS ALSO GIVEN TO OTHER BUSINES S CONCERNS NAMELY M/S. VIRASHA INFRASTRUCTURE, SIGNATURE INFRASTRUCTU RE, SIGNATURE BUILDERS AND SIGNATURE BUILDERS AND COLONISERS. CERTAINLY TH E SEARCH IN THE CASE OF CONCERNS OTHER THAN THE ULTIMATE BUILDERS DID NOT C ONCLUDE ON 02.02.2014 BUT AT THAT POINT OF TIME ON 02.02.2014 THE SEARCH IN THE CASE OF ULTIMATE BUILDERS STOOD CONCLUDED TWO DAYS BEFORE ON 31.1.20 14. 20. WE THEREFORE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT TH E ALLEGED STATEMENT GIVEN BY MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN ON 02.02.2014 MAY BE CON STRUED AS THE SECTION 132(4) OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE OTHER CONCERNS NAMED ABOVE EXCEPT FOR THE ASSESSEE I.E. M/S. ULTIMATE BUILDERS. THERE FORE THE STATEMENT REFERRED TO BY THE LD. A.O ON THE BASIS OF WHICH TH E ADDITION HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IN OUR VIEW CANNO T BE CONSTRUED AS THE STATEMENT U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT. 21. COMING TO THE ISSUE OF ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. A.O ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT BUT NO REFERENCE BEEN GIVEN TO THE INCRIM INATING MATERIAL, WE FIND THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER LD. A.O HAS REFER RED TO VARIOUS SEIZED DOCUMENTS BUT NONE OF THEM IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO T HE ASSESSEE. THESE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ARE OF THE SIGNATURE GROUP AND LD. A.O HAS ONLY MENTIONED THE DETAILS OF THE SEIZED DOCUMENT WITHOU T UTTERING A WORD ABOUT THEIR NEXUS WITH THE BUSINESS TRANSACTION CAR RIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE OR BY POINTING OUT ASSESSEE'S CONNECTION W ITH THE SEIZED DOCUMENT IN NAME OR OTHERWISE. THUS IT CAN BE SAFEL Y CONCLUDED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. A.O WAS NOT ON THE BASIS O N THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH BUT ONLY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT OF MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN GIVEN ON 02.02.2014. 22. RECENTLY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF A CIT(1) VS. SUDEEP MAHESHWARI (SUPRA) IN WHICH THE UNDERSIGNED WAS ALS O A CO-AUTHOR WHILE ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE THAT 'WHETHER ADDITION CAN B E MADE MERELY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT GIVEN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARC H WITHOUT CORRELATING THE STATEMENT WITH INCRIMINATING MATERIAL', WE HAVE DECIDED THE ISSUE OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS:- '6. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH & SEIZURE, NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL OR UNDISCLOSED I NCOME OR INVESTMENTS WERE FOUND. IT IS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDE R MENTAL PRESSURE AND TIRED. THEREFORE, TO BUY PEACE OF MIND, HE ACCEPTED AND DECLARED RS.3 CRORES IN PERSONAL NAME. IT IS ALSO STATED THAT THE CASE LAWS AS RELIED BY THE A.O. ARE NOT APPLICABLE ON THE FACTS OF THE PRE SENT CASE. THE ASSESSEE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 15 HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME C OURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF PULLANGODE RUBBER PRODUCE CO. LTD. 91 ITR 1 8 (SC), WHEREIN THE HON'BLE COURT HAS HELD THAT ADMISSION CANNOT BE SAI D THAT IT IS CONCLUSIVE. RETRACTION FROM ADMISSION WAS PERMISSIBLE IN LAW AN D IT WAS OPEN TO THE PERSON WHO MADE THE ADMISSION TO SHOW THAT IT WAS I NCORRECT. HOWEVER, RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CHANDRAKUMAR JETHMA L KOCHAR (2015) 55 TAXMANN.COM 292 (GUJARAT), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ADMISSION THAT FEW BENAMI CONCERNS WERE BE ING RUN BY ASSESSEE, ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE BASIS FOR MAKING THE ASSESSEE LIABLE FOR TAX AND THE ASSESSEE RETRACTED FROM SUCH ADMISSION AND REVENUE COULD NOT FURNISH ANY CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF SUCH EVIDE NCE. IT WAS FURTHER URGED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT ADMISSION SHOULD BE BASE D UPON CERTAIN CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCES. IN THE ABSENCE OF CORROBOR ATIVE EVIDENCES, THE ADMISSION IS MERELY A HOLLOW STATEMENT. WE HAVE GIV EN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTI ES. IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT H AS A BETTER EVIDENTIARY VALUE BUT IT IS ALSO A SETTLED POSITION OF LAW THAT THE ADDITION CANNOT BE SUSTAINED MERELY ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT. THE RE HAS TO BE SOME MATERIAL CORROBORATING THE CONTENTS OF THE STATEMEN T. IN THE CASE IN HAND, REVENUE COULD NOT POINT OUT AS WHAT WAS THE MATERIA L BEFORE THE A.O., WHICH SUPPORTED THE CONTENTS OF THE STATEMENT. IN T HE ABSENCE OF SUCH MATERIAL, COUPLED WITH THE FACT THAT IT IS RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAD SURRENDERED A SUM OF RS.69,59, 000/- AND RS.75,00,000/- IN A.Y. 2008-09 AND 2009-10 RESPECTI VELY. THE A.O. FAILED TO CO-RELATE THE DISCLOSURES MADE IN THE STATEMENT WITH THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL GATHERED DURING THE SEARCH. THEREFORE, NO INFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND IS HEREBY AFFIRME D. GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED.' 23. HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KAILASHBEN MANGARLAL CHOKSHI VS. CIT - (2008) 14 DTR 257 (GUJ.), HELD THAT MERELY ON TH E BASIS OF ADMISSION, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SUBJ ECT TO ADDITIONS, UNLESS AND UNTIL SOME CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE IS FOU ND IN SUPPORT OF SUCH ADMISSION. 24. HON'BLE JHARKHAND HIGH COURT SHREE GANESH TRADI NG CO. V/S COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TAX CASE NO.8 OF 1999 O RDER DATED 03.01.2013 HELD AS UNDER; '4. WE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED CO UNSEL FOR THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE REASONS GIVEN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER S AS WELL AS REASONS GIVEN IN THE CASE OF KAILASHBEN MANHARLAL CHOKSHI ( SUPRA). ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 16 5. IT APPEARS FROM THE STATEMENT OF FACTS THAT THER E WAS A SEARCH IN THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE PETITIONER'S FIRM AS WELL AS IN THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF ITS PARTNER, SHRI SHEO KUMAR KEJRIWAL, ON 24TH SEPTEMBER, 1987. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, THE STATEMENT OF SHRI SHEO KUMAR KEJRIWAL HAD BEEN RECORDED UNDER SECTION 132(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND IN THE STATEMENT, HE STATED THAT HE WAS PARTNER IN THE GANESH TRADING COMPANY, I.E. THE PRESENT ASSESSEE-FIRM IN HIS INDI VIDUAL STATUS AND THAT HE SURRENDERED RS. 20 LACS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1988-89 AS INCOME, ON WHICH TAX WOULD BE PAID. HE FURTHER STATED THAT OTH ER PARTNERS WOULD AGREE TO THE SAME; OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE HIS PERSON AL LIABILITY. HOWEVER, IN THE RETURNS FILED AFTER SEARCH, THE INCOME OF RS. 2 0 LACS SURRENDERED BY SHRI SHEO KUMAR KEJRIWAL WAS NOT DECLARED BY THE AS SESSEE-FIRM. ON BEING ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR NOT SHOWING T HE SURRENDERED AMOUNT IN THE RETURNS, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TH AT DECLARATION MADE BY THE PARTNER WAS MISCONCEIVED AND DIVORCED FROM REAL FACTS. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE DECLARATION WAS MADE AFTER PERSU ASION, WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI BINOD PODDAR, IN FACT, WAS BECAUSE OF COERCION EXERTED BY THE SEARCH OFFICERS. IN EXPLANATION, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE FIRM OR THE INDIVIDUAL HAD NO UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE ASSESSEE'S SAID RETRACTION WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THE GROUND THAT THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO BE VOLUNTARILY GIVEN STATEMENT DISCLOSING UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 20 LACS. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI BINOD PODDAR, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FULL J URISDICTION TO PROCEED FOR FURTHER ENQUIRY AND COULD HAVE COLLECTED EVIDENCE I N SUPPORT OF ALLEGED ADMISSION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT STATEMENT RECORDED UNDER SECTION 132(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS EVIDENCE BUT ITS RE LIABILITY DEPENDS UPON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND PARTICULARLY SURROUN DING CIRCUMSTANCES. DRAWING INFERENCE FROM THE FACTS IS A QUESTION OF L AW. HERE IN THIS CASE, ALL THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE MERELY REACHED TO THE CO NCLUSION OF ONE CONCLUSION MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ASSUMPTION RESULT ING INTO FASTENING OF THE LIABILITY UPON THE ASSESSEE. THE STATEMENT ON O ATH OF THE ASSESSEE IS A PIECE OF EVIDENCE AS PER SECTION 132(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND WHEN THERE IS INCRIMINATING ADMISSION AGAINST HIMSELF, T HEN IT IS REQUIRED TO BE EXAMINED WITH DUE CARE AND CAUTION. IN THE JUDGMENT OF KAILASHBEN MANHARLAL CHOKSHI (SUPRA), THE DIVISION BENCH OF GU JARAT HIGH COURT HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUE IN THE FACTS OF THAT CASE AND FOUND THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO BE MORE CONVINCING AND THA T WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HERE IN THIS CASE ALSO, N O SPECIFIC REASON HAS BEEN GIVEN FOR REJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE'S CONTENTI ON BY WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS RETRACTED FROM HIS ADMISSION. NONE OF THE AUTHO RITIES GAVE ANY REASON ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 17 AS TO WHY ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT PROCEED FURTHER TO ENQUIRE INTO THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME AS ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN H IS STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 134(2) IN FACT SITUATION WHERE DURING THE COURSE OF SEARC H, THERE WAS NO RECOVERY OF ASSETS OR CASH BY THE DEPA RTMENT. THIS FACT ALSO HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN CARE OF AND CONSIDERED BY ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES THAT IN A CASE WHERE THERE WAS SEARCH OPERATION, NO ASSETS OR CASH WAS RECOVERED FROM THE ASSESSEE, IN THAT SITUATION WHAT HAD PROMP TED THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE DECLARATION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 20 LA CS. MERE READING OF STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE IS NOT THE ASSESSMENT OF EVID ENTIARY VALUE OF THE EVIDENCE WHEN SUCH STATEMENT IS SELF-INCRIMINATING. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE, A WRONG INFERENCE HAD BEEN DRAWN BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN HOLDING THAT THERE WAS UNDISCLOSED INCOME TO THE TUNE OF RS. 20 LACS. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE REASONS, WITHOUT ANSWERING THE QUESTION ABOUT RETROSPECTIVE OPERATION OF THE PROVISO TO SECTION 134(4) , WE ARE HOLDING THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE COMMITTED ERROR OF LAW I N DRAWING INFERENCE FROM THE MATERIALS PLACED ON RECORD, I.E. ADMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE COUPLED WITH ITS RETRACTION BY THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE MA Y NOW PROCEED ACCORDINGLY'. 25. IN THE LIGHT OF RATIO LAID DOWN IN VARIOUS JUDG MENTS REFERRED ABOVE INCLUDING ONE IN THE CASE OF ACIT(1) VS. SUDEEP MAH ESHWARI (SUPRA) DECIDED BY US WHEREIN ALSO WE, AFTER REFERRED VARIO US JUDGMENTS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURTS HAVE HELD THAT ADDITIONS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED MERELY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT GIVEN DURING THE COURSE O F SEARCH WITHOUT CORRELATING THE ADDITION WITH THE INCRIMINATING SEI ZED MATERIAL. THEREFORE THE DECISION RELIED BY LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE LAYING DOWN THE RATIO THAT ADDITION CAN BE MADE EVEN ON THE BASIS O F STATEMENT GIVEN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT I RRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT WHETHER ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS FOUND OR NOT, WILL NOT SUPPORT REVENUE IN THE INSTANT CASE. 26. IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGEMENTS AND DECISIONS REFERRED ABO VE WE FIND THAT FIRSTLY THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY MR. VIPIN CHOUHAN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT ON 02.02.2014 CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS THE STATEMENT GI VEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT IN THE INSTANT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM SINCE THE SEARCH ACTION IN CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS CONCLUDED ON 31.1.2014 BY THE AUTHO RISED OFFICER. SECONDLY AS REGARDS TO OTHER BUSINESS CONCERNS REFE RRED BY MR. VIPIN IN HIS STATEMENT GIVEN ON 02.02.2014 AND IN CASE OF SU CH BUSINESS CONCERN WHEREIN SEARCH ACTION U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CONTIN UING THE SAID STATEMENT DATED 02.02.2014 WILL BE CONSIDERED AS TH E STATEMENT U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT. THIRDLY, NO REFERENCE HAS BEEN G IVEN BY THE REVENUE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 18 AUTHORITIES TO ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DUR ING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH COU LD BE CORRELATED TO THE ALLEGED SURRENDERED INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE F ROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 27. WE THEREFORE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT TH E FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) NEEDS TO BE SET ASIDE AND THE ADDITION OF RS.2,25,0 0,000/- DESERVES TO BE DELETED SINCE IT HAS BEEN MADE ON THE BASIS OF A ST ATEMENT NOT GIVEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT AND WITHOUT REFERRING TO ANY INCR IMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. ADDITION FOR UNDISCLOS ED INCOME OF RS.2,25,00,000/- IS DELETED. ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO. 1 RAISED IN THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED.' 31. FROM PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE FINDING OF THIS TRIBU NAL IN THE CASE OF M/S ULTIMATE BUILDERS (SUPRA), WE FIND THAT THE COMMON ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO.3 OF M/S SIGNATURE BUILDERS IS IDENTICAL TO THE ISSUE RAISED AND ADJUDICATED IN THE CASE OF M/S ULTIMATE BUILDERS (S UPRA). WE THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE IDENTICAL FACT THAT IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS.25,00,000/-AND RS.3,00,00,0 00/- MADE BY THE LD. A.O WAS PURELY BASED ON THE STATEMENT GIVEN U/S 132(4) OF THE ACT AND THERE WAS NO REFERENCE TO ANY INCRIMINATING MAT ERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WHICH M/S SIGNATURE BUILDERS & ORS ITA NO.184 TO 186/IND/2018 & ORS COULD SUPPORT THE IMPUGNED ADDIT ION, WE THUS DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.25,00,000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AND RS.3,00,00,000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 AND SE T ASIDE THE FINDING OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND ACCORDINGLY ALLOW GROUND NO.3 RAISED IN ASSESSEE'S APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013-14 AND 2014-15 RAISED IN ITA NO.185-186/IND/2018 12. WE, THEREFORE, UNDER THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEME NTS REFERRED HEREINABOVE SQUARELY APPLICABLE ON THE ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN INSTANT APPEAL AND ALSO IN ABSENCE OF ANY BINDING P RECEDENTS IN FAVOUR OF REVENUE REFERRED BEFORE US BY LD. DR, ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS.1,60,00,000/- DESE RVES TO BE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 19 DELETED, AS IT IS BASED ONLY ON THE STATEMENT RECO RDED U/S 132(4) HAVING NO NEXUS WHATSOEVER WITH ANY INCRIMINATING/S EIZED MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CARRIED OUT U/S 1 32 OF THE ACT AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY SOLE GROU ND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 13. NOW WE TAKE UP REVENUES APPEAL IN IT(SS)ANO.20 5/IND/2019 THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1.ON FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.18,84,500/- MADE BY ASS ESSING OFFICER U/S 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED I NVESTMENT IN LOANS IN PAWNING BUSINESS. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,07,500/- MADE BY ASSE SSING OFFICER U/S 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVE STMENT IN LOANS IN MONEY LENDING BUSINESS AS PER DIARY BS-4. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 60,00,000/- MADE BY AS SESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH FOUND DURING COURSE OF SEARCH. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,25,544/- MADE BY ASSE SSING OFFICER U/S 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVE STMENT IN LOANS IN MONEY LENDING AS PER DIARY BS-44. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.5,00,000/- MADE BY ASSE SSING OFFICER U/S 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED EXPENDITURE ON BASIS OF LPS-1 SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE CUM SHOWROOM AT RAI LWAY STATION ROAD, VIDISHA. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,18,16,751/- MADE BY A SSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED STOCK OF GOLD AND SILVER. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 20 14. LD. DR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED SUPPORTING THE ORDER O F LD. AO AND ALSO REFERRED TO THE PAPER BOOK DATED 03.11.2012 CONTAIN ING VARIOUS REPORT INCLUDING PERMANENT REPORT WHICH ARE FORWARDED BY T HE LD. AO. 15. PER CONTRA LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMEN TLY ARGUED REFERRING TO THE WRITTEN SUBMISISONS FILED ON 21.08 .2020 RUNNING FROM PAGE 1 TO 22 AND ALSO MADE REFERENCE TO THE FOLLOWI NG DOCUMENTS FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK RUNNING FROM PAGE 1 TO 529. THE D ETAILS FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK REFERRED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE ARE AS FOLLOWS: INDEX-I GENERAL S.N O. PARTICULARS PAGE NOS. 1. COPY OF SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) 1-32 2. LETTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) UNDER RULE 46A 33-34 COPY ITR, COMPUTATION OF INCOME, TAR, BALANCE SHEET, P&L ALC 3. ALONG WITH SCHEDULES FOR A. Y. 2016-17 AND 2015-16 35-73 4. COPY OF STATEMENT RECORDED OF SHRI SANJAY JAIN, SHIKHAR JAIN 74-126 5. COPY OF INVENTORY OF PAWN JEWELLERY 127-131 COPY OF SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE LD. A.O. ALONG WITH COPY OF 6. LEDGER ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE OF GOLD AND SILVER 132-141 7. COPY OF SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE LD. A.O. IN RESPECT OF SURRENDER OF 142-147 AMOUNT U/S 132(4) DETAILS OF PURCHASE OF JEWELLERY BEFORE SEARCH BUT ENTERED IN BOOKS 8. AFTER THE SEARCH WITH THE BILLS AND COPY OF CON FIRMATION FROM THE 148-171 ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 21 LEDGER ACCOUNT OF PARTIES . INDEX - II GROUND-L, 2, 4 & 5 S.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NOS. DETAILS OF INTEREST INCOME AND INVESTMENT IN MONEY LENDING 1. BUSINESS 172- 190 COPY ITR, COMPUTATION OF INCOME, BALANCE SHEET, P&L NC OF 2. SHRI SANJAY JAIN, SHRI RAJEEV JAIN, SMT. BHAWNA JAIN, SMT. 191- 300 MONICA JAIN FOR A Y. 2010-11 TO 2016-17 COPY ITR AND COMPUTATION OF INCOME OF SHRI ALOK JAI N FOR A Y. 3. 2012-13 TO 2016-17 AND BALANCE SHEET, P&L ALC FOR AY. 2010- 301- 321 11 TO 2016-17 4. COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER OF SHRI SANJAY JAIN 3 22- 344 5. COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER OF SHRI RAJEEV JAIN 3 45- 365 6. COPY OF BS-44 PG.LL 366- 367 7. COPY OFLPS -1 PAGE 2, 3, 19,21,50,62,63 & 64 3 68-375 8. DETAILS OF DONATIONS GIVEN TO PANDIT TODARMAL S MARAK TRUST 376-381 INDEX-II I S.N O. PARTICULARS PAGE NOS. 1. LIST OF INVENTORY OF JEWELLERY FOUND AND SEIZED 38 2-385 2. COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE OF GOLD AND SILV ER 386-390 COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE AND WILL OF CHAM ELI DEV I WITH COPY OF BHU-ADHIKAR AND RIN PUSTIKA OF AGRICULTURAL LAND H ELD BY EXECUTOR ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 22 3. AND COPIES OF AFFIDAVIT OF SI-LL'I ARUN KARNEKAR, M R. MALUKCHAND, 391-413 MR. KALYANMAL AND MR. DEVENDRA JAIN WHO ARE WITNES S TO THE WILL AND THE ADVOCATE WHO DRAFTED THE WILL. COPY OF WEALTH TAX RETURNS OFSHIKHARCHAND JAIN, AJ AY JAIN, SANJAY 4. JAIN, MONIKA JAIN, BHAWNA JAIN AND RAJEEV JAIN 414-448 COPY OF BILLS FOR PURCHASE OF JEWELLERY BEFORE THE SEARCH BUT 5. ENTERED AFTER SEARCH 449-505 6. COPY OF AFFIDAVITS OF VARIOUS PARTIES FROM WHOM PUR CHASES WERE 506-515 MADE COPY OF SALES OF ORNAMENTS TO SMT. MEENA JAIN AND SHRI ASHOK 7. JAIN WITH COPY OF PASSPORT AND AIR TICKETS FOR FORE IGN TRAVEL BY SMT. 516-521 MEENA JAIN 8. COPY OF SUMMON ISSUED ULS 131 TO SMT. MEENA JAIN & SHRI ASHOK 522-523 JAIN 9. COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF SMT. MEENA JAIN AND SHRI A SHOK JAIN 524-527 10. COPY OF MANUAL AND COMPUTERIZED CASH BOOK AS O N 01/04/2015 528-529 16. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO REFERRED TO R EMAND REPORT DATED 06.05.2019 GIVEN BY THE LD. AO AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN REPLY TO THE REMAND REPORT DATED 16.05.2019 IN PAPER BOOK DA TED 13.10.2020. 17. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE VARIOUS DO CUMENTS FILED BY BOTH SIDES. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 23 18. GROUND NO.1 & 2 RELATS TO ADDITION OF RS.18,84, 500/- U/S 69 OF THE ACT FOR ALLEGED PAWNING BUSINESS AND THE ADDITI ON OF RS.3,07,500/- MADE FOR MONEYLENDING BUSINESS CALCUL ATED AS PER CEASED DIARY BS-4. 19. BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO ALLEGED PAWNING BUSINES S IT WAS STATED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ONE DIARY (BS-4) WAS FO UND AND SEIZED IN WHICH VARIOUS AMOUNTS WERE WRITTEN AGAINST DIFFEREN T NAMES ON VARIOUS DATES. THESE WERE RELATED TO LOANS AND ADVA NCES GIVEN TO VARIOUS PERSON AGAINST PLEDGE OF GOLD ORNAMENTS REC EIVED AS SECURITY. THEY WERE ALSO PHYSICALLY FOUND AND INVENTORISED. D ETAILS OF THE DATES ON WHICH THE LOAN/ADVANCE WAS GIVEN AND OTHER CONDI TION OF THE LOANS WERE FOUND ATTACHED TO THE PLEDGED JEWELLERY ITEMS BASED ON WHICH THE YEAR WISE AMOUNT OF LOANS GIVEN WERE TABULATED AND MENTIONED AT PAGE NO. 11TO 14 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. DURING TH E COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. AO THAT THE PAWNING BUSINESS WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ALL SUC H TRANSACTIONS WERE RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE INDIV IDUAL FAMILY MEMBERS AND SUCH BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE PRODUCED BE FORE THE AO FOR HIS VERIFICATION AND COPY OF THE SAME WAS ALSO FILE D. CASH/FUND FLOW ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 24 STATEMENT AND THE BALANCE SHEETS OF THE PARTNERS FO R VARIOUS YEARS WERE ALSO FURNISHED BEFORE THE AO. DETAILS OF INVE STMENT MADE IN THE PAWNING BUSINESS AND THE INCOME EARNED FROM IT BY V ARIOUS PERSONS WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF T HEIR RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENTS. WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT THE LD. A .O. MADE THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM OF RS.18,84,500/- ON THE GROUND OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN THE PAWNING BUSINESS ON T HE BASIS OF THE ENTRIES IN DIARY IN BS-4. THE A.O. DISREGARDED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASH FLOWS/FUND FLOW/BALANCE SHEET S/ CASH BOOK LEDGER/DETAILS OF INTEREST INCOME AND INVESTMENT, F ILED AND HELD THAT THE ACTIVITY OF FINANCING WAS DONE BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND THE TRANSACTIONS UNDERTAKEN WERE ALL UNRECORDED AND MAD E ADDITIONS IN VARIOUS YEARS IN WHICH THE FINANCED AMOUNT WAS GIVE N.SUCH INFERENCE WAS DRAWN BY THE LD. AO AFTER OBSERVING THAT SHRI S ANJAY JAIN IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH HAVE ACCEPTED DISCLOSURE OF RS. 65 LAC IN THE HANDS OF A LANKAR JEWELERS ON ACCOUNT OF ENTRIES IN BS-4 WHICH CONTAINED LIST OF SOME PAWNING ARTICLE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE LD. AO FURTHER HELD THAT THE FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE NOT SHOWN INTEREST INCOME O N MONEY LENDING ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 25 BUSINESS REGULARLY IN THEIR ITR AND THUS CONCLUDED THAT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS AN AFTERTHOUGHT. 20. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE MATTER WAS TAKEN BEFOR E THE LD. CIT(A) WHO ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT THE INT EREST INCOME FROM PAWNING BUSINESS AND OTHER ADVANCES IS SHOWN IN THE HANDS OF THE PARTNERS OF THE FIRM REGULARLY AND THE FIRM DOES N OT CARRY ON ANY BUSINESS OF PAWNING OR ADVANCES FOR INTEREST. THE L D. CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE NECESSARY INVESTMENT IN PAWNING B USINESS AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS IS SHOWN IN BALANCE SHEET OF RESPECTIVE PARTNERS AND THE PAWNING SLIPS DOES NOT CONTAIN THE NAME OF THE FIRM AND HELD THAT UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITI ON CANNOT BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM AND DELETED ALL THE A DDITIONS IN RESPECT OF ADVANCES IN THE PAWNING BUSINESS. 21. FURTHER BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THE ADDITION OF RS.3,07,500/- FOR ALLEGED MONEY LENDING BUSINESS IT WAS STATED BEFORE US THAT AS INDICATED ABOVE THE DIARY BS-4 CONTAINED ENTRIES RE LATED TO GIRVI TRANSACTIONS UNDERTAKEN BY THE PARTNERS AND FAMILY MEMBERS. ORNAMENTS RECEIVED IN PLEDGE AS SECURITY FOR THE LO ANS GIVEN WERE ALSO FOUND AND INVENTORY OF THE SAME WAS PREPARED. TRAN SACTIONS RECORDED ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 26 IN THIS DIARY WERE RECONCILED BY THE DEPARTMENT WIT H THE INVENTORY OF PLEDGED ARTICLES. TRANSACTIONS APPEARING IN THIS DI ARY AGAINST WHICH NO PLEDGED ORNAMENT WAS PHYSICALLY FOUND IN THE INVENT ORY OF PLEDGED ARTICLES WAS HELD AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN LOAN BUSINESS AND ADDITIONS WERE MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT. DETAILED SUB MISSION WERE MADE BEFORE THE AO SUBMITTING THAT THE ACTIVITY OF MONEYLENDING BUSINESS WAS UNDERTAKEN BY THE PARTNERS AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AND THE INCOME FROM TH E SAME IS DULY OFFERED TO TAX IN THEIR ITR AND THE DIARY HAD NO RE LATION WITH THE ASSESSEE FIRM. MANY TRANSACTIONS WHICH HAVE IN FACT BEEN SQUARED UP WERE NOT DELETED AND REMAINED IN THE DIARY AND DID NOT REPRESENT ANY INVESTMENT. THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE WERE IGN ORED BY THE AO AND ADDITIONS WERE MADE U/S 69.THE LD. CIT(A) DELET ED THE ADDITIONS HOLDING THAT THE MONEY LENDING BUSINESS IS CONDUCTE D BY THE PARTNERS AND HENCE THE ADDITION CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. 22. WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAD EXAMINED THE FACTS IN DETAIL AND DELETED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OBSERVING AS FOLL OWS: 5.1.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EVID ENCE ON RECORD INTER-ALIA PLEA RAISED BY THE APPELLANT AND FINDINGS OF THE AO . DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH DIARY BS-4 WAS FOUND AND SEIZED WHICH CONTAI N DETAILS OF DATE WISE LOANS GIVEN TO VARIOUS PERSONS AGAINST PLEDGE OF GO LD ORNAMENTS. THE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 27 JEWELLERY RECEIVED AS SECURITY AGAINST THE LOAN AMO UNTS GIVEN WERE ALSO PHYSICALLY FOUND AND INVENTORIED BY THE SEARCH PART Y. DETAILS OF THE DATES ON WHICH THE LOAN/ADVANCE WAS GIVEN AND OTHER CONDITIO N OF THE LOANS WERE FOUND ATTACHED TO THE PLEDGED JEWELLERY ITEMS BASED ON WHICH THE YEAR WISE AMOUNT OF LOANS GIVEN WERE TABULATED AND MENTIONED AT PAGE NO. 11TO 14 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE AO A S WELL AS BEFORE ME HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE PAWNING BUSINESS WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS AND ALL THE TRANS ACTIONS RELATING TO PAWNING BUSINESS ARE FULLY RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACC OUNT OF RESPECTIVE FAMILY MEMBER. THE VARIOUS FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAS BEEN SHOWING INTEREST INCOME FROM PAWNING BUSINESS IN THE ITR FILED BY THEM ULS 139. THE INCOME IS SHOWN BY THEM ON CASH BASIS AS AND WHEN IT IS RECEIVED. THUS, THIS FACT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT ALL TH E TRANSCTION RELATING TO , PAWING BUSINESS ARE CARRIED OUT BY THE FAMILY MEMBE RS. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO FILED COPY OF DETAILED CHART DETAILED CHART CO NTAINING THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED FROM PAWNING ACTIVITY AND INVESTMENT MADE IN SUCH BUSINESS IN VARIOUS YEARS BY THE VARIOUS FAMILY MEMBERS. ON PER USAL OF THE DETAILS FILED BY THE APPELLANT IS WAS OBSERVED THAT SHRI SANJAY J AIN, SHRI RAJCEN JAIN,SMT BHAWANA JAIN AND SMT MONIKA JAIN HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN PAWNING AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS AND THE INCOME EARNED FROM P AWNING AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS HAVE ALSO BEEN INCORPORATED IN RET URN OF INCOME FILED IN INDIVIDUAL CASES. 5.1.3THE JEWELLEY PLEDGED AGAINST LOAN GIVEN WAS FO UND FROM POSSESSION' OF SHRI SHIKHAR CHNAD JAIN AND NOT FROM BUSINESS PREMI SES OF THE APPELLANT. FURTHER 'THE INVENTORY SHEET PREPARED' FROM PAWNING OF JEWELLERY AT THE TIME OF SEARCH ALSO STATES THAT THE JEWELLEY IS CLAIMED TO BE BELONGING TO SHRI SC JAIN. ON PERUSAL OF COPY OF IMPUGNED REGISTER BS-4 IT WAS OBSERVED THAT NAME OF THE ' APPELLANT FIRM IS NOT MENTIONED ON ANY OF THE PAGE AND NAME OF SANJAY, RAJEEV, BHAWANA AND MONIKA ARE MENTIONED ON VARIOUS PAGES WHICH ALSO INDICATES TO THE POINT THAT THE APPELLANT WAS NOT INVOLVED IN PAWNING AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS. STATEMENT OF ALL THE FAMILY MEMBERS WERE RECORDED ON OATH, SHRI SHIKAR CHAND JAIN DURING HIS STATEMEN T RECORDED ON OATH IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO Q-13 HAS SPECIFICALLY SUBMITTE D THAT 'ALMARI SE PRAPT HONE WALE SONE EVAM CHANDI KE JEWAR MAIRE GIRVI KE VYAVSAY SE SAMBANDHIT HAI THATHA HEERE KE JEWAR JO KEE ALMARI SE MILE HAI WAH MERI FIRM ALANKAR JEWELERS KE HAI', THE STATEMENT OF SHRI SHIKAR CHAND JAIN ITSELF EXPL AIN THAT THE ONLY DIAMOND JEWELRY FOUND IN THE ALMIRAH BELON GS TO APPELLANT FIRM AND NOT THE JEWELLEY PLEDGED AGAINST LOANS GIVEN BY SHI SHIKAR CHAND JAIN. FURTHER, SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN IN REPLY TO QUESTI ON NO 11 HAS ADMITTED THAT THIS DIARY (ES-4) HAS BEEN WRITTEN BY HIM AND IS RE LATED TO 'GIRVI'. HOWEVER, ANOTHER PARTNER SHRI SANJAY JAIN WAS ASKED TO EXPLA IN THE TRANSACTIONS MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED DIARY WHICH ARE NOT RECOR DED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE FIRM. IN REPLY SHRI SANJAY JAIN ADMITTED THA T THESE TRANSACTIONS ARE NOT RECORDED IN BOOKS VI ACCOUNTS OF THE APPELLANT FIRM AND MADE DECLARATION OF ADDITIONAL INCOME WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH OTHER PAR TNERS. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 28 5.1.4 THE AO ON THE CONTRARY HAS MADE A PRESUMPTIVE BELIEF THAT THE APPELLANT FIRM IS ONLY INVOLVED IN PAWNING AND MONE Y LENDING BUSINESS AND STATED IN PARA THAT NO REGULAR INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON SUCH LENDING ACTIVATES HAVE BEEN SHOWN BY THE FAMILY MEMBERS IN REGULAR RETURN OF INCOME. ,HOWEVER, IT IS IMPORTANT TO MENTION THAT T HE PARTNERS HAVE QUANTIFIED THE INVESTMENT IN GIRVI TRANSACTIONS AND FOUND A SU M OF RS. 15,33,0001- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN OFFE RED BY RESPECTIVE FAMILY MEMBER WHILE FILING RETURN OF INCOME U/S 153A OF THE ACT. ONCE, THE AO, HAS ACCEPTED UNEXPLAINED INCOME AND INCOME DECLARED BY THE FAMILY MEMBERS IN THEIR RESPECTIVE RETURNS OF INCOME FOR EARLIER YEAR S RELATING TO PAWNING AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS, THERE LIES NO LOCUS ON THE, AD TO PRESUME THAT THE TRANSACTIONS RELATING TO PAWING AND MONEY LENDING B USINESS HAVE BEEN ACTUALLY DONE BY THE APPELLANT. 5.1.5 FURTHER, THERE WERE VARIOUS ENTRIES CORRESPONDING T O WHICH NO PLEDGED JEWELLERY WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. TH E APPELLANT IN THIS REGARD HAS STATED THAT THE LOAN GIVEN WAS REPAID BY THE BE NEFICIARY OF THE LOAN. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS INTO TOTALITY THE ONLY PICTURE WHICH EMERGES OUT IS THAT THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE AO ON PRES UMPTIVE BELIEF THAT THE IMPUGNED DIARY WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH CONTAINS UNRECORDED TRANSACTIONS OF PAWNING AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS OF THE APPELLANT. HOWEVER, THE AO FAILED TO BRING ANY CORROBORATIVE E VIDENCE HAVING DIRECT NEXUS OF UNDISCLOSED PAWNING AND MONEY LENDING BUSI NESS EVEN WHEN THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT FIRM ON ANY OF THE PAGE OF THE IMPUNGED DIARY. FURTHER, THE PARTNERS HAVE CLAIMED TO HAVE SHOWN THE INTEREST INCOME AND INCOME FROM MONEY LENDING TO TH EIR INCOME AND HAS SHOWN THE SAME IN RETURN OF INCOME WHICH WAS ALSO A CCEPTED BY THE AO. THEREFORE, THE PRESUMPTION OF AO THAT APPELLANT HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN PAWNING AND MONEY LENDING BUSINESS HOLD NO GROUND. 5.1.6 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE AO WAS N OT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION ON GUESS WORK AND IMAGINATION BASIS EVEN W HEN THE PARTNERS OF THE APPELLANT .FIRM HAS CLAIMED OF DOING PAWNING AND MO NEY LENDING BUSINESS. THE AO RATHER MAKING ADDITION IN HANDS OF APPELLANT OUGHT TO HAVE MADE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME NOT DISCLOSED IN THE HANDS OF RESPECTIVE FAMILY MEMBER. THUS, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS. 48,000/- & RS, 87,000/- IN AY 2012-13, RS. 9,75,500/- & RS. 5,37,003/- IN AY 2013-14, RS. 7,36,400/- & RS.17,21,260/- IN AY 2014-15, RS. 17,20,568/- & RS. 21,60,500/- IN AY 2015-16 AN RS .. 18,84,500/- & RS. 3,07,500/- IN AY 2016-17 ARE DELETED. THEREFORE, APPEAL ON THESE GRO UNDS IS ALLOWED. 23. FROM PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) AND THE FACTS PLACED BEFORE US, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE A LLEGED PAWNING ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 29 BUSINESS WAS NOT CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM A ND IT WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE PARTNERS AND THE I NCOME FROM PAWNING BUSINESS HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN FILED BY THEM. THIS FACT IS SUPPORTED BY COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURN COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND BALANCE SHEET PLACED IN THE PAPER BOO K. THUS NO ADDITION WAS CALLED FOR U/S 69 OF THE ACT AT RS. 18 ,84,500/- AND HAS BEEN RIGHTLY DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 24. SIMILARLY, REGARDING THE ADDITION FOR MONEY LEN DING BUSINESS WE FIND THAT THIS WAS ALSO CARRIED OUT BY THE PARTNERS OF THE FIRM AND THEY HAVE ALREADY SURRENDERED INCOME OF RS.15,33,000/- F OR THE ALLEGED MONEY LENDING BUSINESS IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL HANDS. S INCE THE ALLEGED SEIZED DOCUMENTS REFERRED FOR MAKING ALLEGED ADDITI ON ARE NOT CONNECTED TO THE ASSESSEE FIRM, NO ADDITION OF RS.3 ,07,500/- WAS CALLED FOR U/S 69 OF THE ACT. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. ACCORDINGLY GROUN D NO.1 & 2 OF REVENUES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2016-17 STANDS DISMISSED. 25. NOW WE TAKE UP GROUND NO.3 RELATING TO ADDITION OF RS.60,00,000/- MADE BY THE LD. AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH F OUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 30 26. BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THIS ADDITION AS STATED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN MAINTAININ G REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHICH ARE DULY AUDITED AND THESE WERE PRES ENTED BEFORE THE LD. AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE AO HAD NOT FOUND ANY DEFICIENCY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND H AS NOT REJECTED THEM AND HAS ALSO NOT INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 145(3). THE BALANCE AS PER THE COMPUTERIZED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH WAS RS. 73,31,037/- AND THE SOURCE OF SUCH C ASH BALANCE WAS DULY RECORDED IN THE BOOKS AND WAS READILY VERIFIAB LE. THE AO COULD NOT HAVE DISBELIEVED THE CASH BALANCE APPEARING IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WITHOUT REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HO WEVER, AS PER THE MANUALLY MAINTAINED BOOKS THE BALANCE WAS 10,15,919 /- AS ON 08/08/2015. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. TH AT THESE BALANCES IN THE MANUALLY MAINTAINED BOOKS ARE COMING FROM 01 /04/2015 WHICH WERE NOT CORRECT AND WERE RECORDED IN PENCIL. SINCE THE AUDIT FOR THE F.Y. 2014-15 WAS PENDING THE BALANCES WERE NOT INKED OUT. THE LD. AO HAD HOWEVER CONSIDERED RS.60 LACS AS UNEXPLA INED ON THE BASIS OF FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: A. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT S WERE COMPLETED ONLY TILL 08.08.16, THE ASSESSEE REQUESTE D FOR A ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 31 RECONCILIATION OF CASH BOOK AND AFTER VERIFYING WIT H THE ACCOUNTANT, THE CASH BALANCE AS PER THE RECORD WAS ARRIVED AT R S. 10,00,000/- B. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH SHRI. SANJAY JAIN EX PLAINED THAT CASH BALANCE AS PER BOOKS WAS RS. 10 LAKH AND REMAI NING CASH APP RS. 60 LAKH WAS NOT ENTERED IN THE BOOKS OF ACC OUNTS AND HE DECLARED THE SAME AS ADDITIONAL INCOME. 27. THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 5.6 DELETED THE ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT THE OPENING CASH BALANCE AS ON 01/04/2015 AS PER A UDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS SHOWED A BALANCE OF MORE THAN 76 LAKHS W HILE THE MANUAL CASH BOOK SHOWED THE BALANCE OF 26 LAKHS. THE LD. A .O. HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY MISTAKE IN THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS SUB MITTED BEFORE HIM. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE ADDITIONS CANNOT BE MAINTAINED. 28. BEFORE US LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS:- THAT THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BE EN MAINTAINING BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ON COMPUTER AND SUCH BOOKS WERE WRI TTEN UP TILL 30.06.2015. EVEN THE ENTRIES MADE PRIOR TO 30.06.20 15 IN THE BOOKS WERE ALSO OPEN TO CHANGES AS WAS SPECIFICALLY MENTI ONED BY THE PARTNER DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE OBSERVATION OF THE AO THAT THE CASH BALANCE WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 10 LAC AFTER CONSULTATI ON IS NOT FACTUALLY CORRECT. REFERENCE IN THIS REGARD IS DRAWN TO CONCLUD ING STATEMENT OF THE PARTNER S.C. JAIN RECORDED ON 22.08.2015 (PG.115-126 OF PB-I) IN WHICH HE HAS STATED (PG.118) THAT COMPUTERIZED BOOKS ARE COMPLETED UP TILL 30.06.15. SOME ENTRIES PERTAINING TO PERIOD PRIOR TO 30.06.15 ARE ALSO NOT RECORDED. I AM UNABLE TO PRODUCE THE P&L/BALANCE SHEET/STOCK REGISTER UP TO 20.08.2015 DUE TO ABOVE REASON. THE PARTNER HAS ALSO STATED THAT (REPLY TO Q-8) AFTER RECORDING OF SALE B ILLS UP TILL 20.08.15 THE CASH BALANCE WOULD WORK OUT TO AROUND 40-45 LAKH. HO WEVER CASH PHYSICALLY FOUND WILL BE IN EXCESS OF SUCH CASH BY APP 25-30 LAKH ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 32 WHICH I AM UNABLE TO EXPLAIN, AND HENCE ACCEPT TH E SAME AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF ALANKAR JEWELERS FOR FY 15-16. THESE STATEMENTS CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOU NTS WERE NOT COMPLETED AND THE PARTNERS HAVE MADE A WILD GUESS REGA RDING THE CASH BALANCE. SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN IN HIS STATEMENT STAT ED THAT THE CASH BALANCE OF ABOUT 25-30 LAKH MAY BE UNEXPLAINED. HOW EVER, THE OTHER PARTNER CONSIDERING THE MANUAL CASH BOOK HAS SURREN DERED AN AMOUNT OF RS.60 LAKHS AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. IT WAS ALSO S UBMITTED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE THAT ONE OF THE PARTNERS IN HIS STATEME NT (PG.119 OF PB-I) HAS STATED THAT THE CASH BOOK HAS BEEN WRITTEN UPTO 08/08/2015, THE CASH BALANCES HAVE BEEN NOTED WITH PENCIL IN MANUAL CASH BOOK AND THE CASH BALANCE AS ON 08/08/2015 HAS BEEN MENTIONE D AT RS.10,47,368/-. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CAS H BALANCE WAS NOT INKED OUT BECAUSE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR F.Y. 201 4-15 WERE UNDER AUDIT AND WERE TO BE FINALIZED. AS PER THE AUDITED BO OKS OF ACCOUNTS THE CASH BALANCE IS SHOWN AT RS. 73,31,037/- AS ON 21/0 8/2015. THE BALANCE SHOWN IN THE COMPUTERIZED CASH BOOK AS ON 01 /04/2015 IS RS.76,16,708/- WHILE IN THE MANUAL CASH BOOK, THE B ALANCE AS ON 01/04/2015 IS TAKEN AT RS.26,13,010/-. AFTER THE CO MPLETION OF THE AUDIT, THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WH ICH SHOWED THE CASH BALANCE AS ON THE DATE OF THE SEARCH AT RS.73, 31,037/-. IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE CASH BALANCE AS ON 31/03/ 2015 IN THE AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE LD . A.O. ONCE THIS POSITION IS ACCEPTED THEN CASH BALANCE HAS TO BE CON SIDERED WHILE DETERMINING THE CASH BALANCE AS ON THE DATE OF THE S EARCH. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ACTUAL OPENING BALANCE AS PER THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS ON 31.03.2015 WAS RS. 76,16,708.71 W HICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHILE ASCERTAININ G THE CASH BALANCE AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY COMPLETED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, GOT THEM AUDITED AND PRODUCED SUCH A UDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE LD. AO HAS NEITHER BROUGHT ON RECORD ANY DEF ICIENCY IN THE BOOKS PRODUCED AND NOR HAS REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOU NTS. THUS, THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ADOPTING THE CASH BALANCE AS CERTAINED WITHOUT ANY SUPPORTING DATA, ON A PURE GUESS WORK IN PREFER ENCE TO THE CASH BALANCE APPEARING IN THE DULY AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS. ONE OF THE PARTNER HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT THE CASH BALAN CE SHOULD BE AROUND 40-45 LAKHS. THE OTHER PARTNER HAS, THROUGH A WRONG NOTION, DEPENDING UPON THE MANUAL CASH BOOK HAS WRONGLY SURRENDERED RS .60 LAKHS. THE DECLARATION WAS CONTRADICTED DURING THE SEARCH PROCEED INGS ITSELF, AND WAS BASED ON A WILD GUESS WORK WITHOUT MAKING ANY CAL CULATIONS AND THUS, NO RELIANCE COULD HAVE BEEN PLACED ON THE SAME. UNDER THESE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 33 CIRCUMSTANCES THE ADDITIONS DELETED BY THE LD. CIT( A) IS QUITE CORRECT AND THE DELETION OF THIS AMOUNT MAY PLEASE BE CONFIR MED.IT MAY BE SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE INDORE BENCH IN URMILA AG RAWAL V/S. ACIT REPORTED IN 24 ITJ 786 HAS HELD THAT WHERE THE CASH B OOK PRODUCED IS NEITHER REJECTED NOR ANY DEFICIENCY FOUND, NO ADDITI ON CAN BE MADE DISALLOWING THE CREDIT IN DAY TO DAY BALANCES. THE SURRENDER MADE BY THE PARTNER ON A WRONG NOTION CANNOT BE THE GROUND F OR MAKING ANY ADDITION. IN THIS CONNECTION, ATTENTION IS DRAWN TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE INDORE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI SUDIP MAHE SHWARI IN ITA 524/IND/2013 PRONOUNCED ON 13/02/2019 AND IN THE CASE OF M/S ULTIMATE BUILDERS IN ITA 134/2019 PRONOUNCES ON 09/0 8/2019. 29. WE FURTHER FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.60,00,000/- FOR THE ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH FOU ND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS: 5.6 GROUND NO 6 FOR AY 2016-17:- THROUGH THIS GROUN D OF APPEAL, THE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED ADDITION OF RS. 60,00,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. 69.25 LAKHS WAS FOUND FROM SHOW ROOM OF THE ASSESSEE. SHRI SANJAY JAIN WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE AND ACQUISITION OF CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. 60 LAKHS; HOWEVER, HE FAIL ED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND MADE VOL UNTARY DISCLOSURE OF RS. 60 IAKHS AS ADDITIONAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FIRM FAILED TO OFFER THE SAID ADDITIONAL INCOME TO TAX WHILE FILING RETURN OF INCOME U/S 153A OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE AO DURIN G THE COURSE OF SEARCH REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR OF FERING LOWER VALUE OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSE E IN REPLY SUBMITTED THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE NOT COMPLETED AS ON DATE OF SEARCH AND LATER ON WHEN THE SAME WERE COMPLETED, THERE IS CASH BALANCE OF THE IMPUNGED AMOUNT IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE AO AFTER CONSIDERI NG REPLY OF THE ASSESSE DID NOT FIND THE SAME ACCEPTABLE AND STATED THAT SU BMISSION OF THE ASSESSE IS NOTHING BUT AN AFTERTHOUGHT. 5.6.1 THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HAS SUBMITTED THAT SHRI SHIKAR CHAND JAIN DURING HIS STATEMENT RE CORDED ON OATH HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE NOT MAINTA INE., IN TALLY FROM 30.06.2015 AND FEW ENTRIES OF PRIOR DATES ARE ALSO NOT MENTIONED, HOWEVER, AFTER MAKING ALL THE ENTRIES OF SALE AND PURCHASE T HE CASH WOULD BE AROUND 40-45 IAKHS AND LEAVING A DIFFERENCE OF RS. 25-30 I AKHS WHICH HE WAS UNABLE TO EXPLAIN: ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 34 HOWEVER, AS PER MANUAL CASH BOOK TILL 08.08.2015 CA SH AMOUNTING TO RS. 10,15,919/- WAS MENTIONED WITH OPENING CASH BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2015 OF RS. 26,13,010/- WHICH AS PER AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOU NT WAS RS. 76,16,70J.71. FURTHER, THE AO HAS TAKEN INTO CONSID ERATION THE ACTUAL CASH BALANCE AS 0 DATE OF SEARCH AS NIL, HOWEVER, THE SAME AS PER AUD ITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WAS RS. 76,26,708.71. 5.6.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EVID ENCES ON RECORD AND FINDINGS OF THE AO. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH RS. 69.25 1AKHS WAS FOUND FROM POSSESSION OF APPELLANT AND PARTNERS OF THE AP PELLANT FIRM. THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION ON THIS ACCOUNT MAINLY ON TWO COUNTS (I) THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT WERE NOT COMPLETED AND THE CASH BA LANCE OF RS. 10,00,000/- WAS CALCULATED AFTER VERIFICATION AND RECONCILIATIO N OF CASH BOOK AND (II) SHRI SANJAY JAIN HAS ADMITTED UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 60 LAKHS. (I) INCOMPLETE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT AS ON DATE OF SEA RCH.- SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH EXPLAINED THAT BOO KS OF ACCOUNT HAD BEEN WRITTEN TILL 30.06.2015 IN TALLY SOFTWARE AND FEW O F THE ENTRIES MADE PRIOR TO 30.06.2015 ARE ALSO NOT ENTERED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT S. SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT AFTER RECORDING OF ALL SALES BILLS AND AFTER MAKING OTHER POSTINGS TILL 20.08.2015 THE CASH BALANCE WOU LD WORK OUT AROUND 40-45 LAKHS AND REGARDING PHYSICAL CASH FOUND IN EXCESS T O 25-30 LAKHS HE IS UNABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SAME. DURING THE COURSE OF SE ARCH A MANUAL CASH BOOK WAS FOUND AND SEIZED ACCORDING TO WHICH THE CASH BA LANCE OF APPELLANT AS ON 08.08.2015 WAS RS. 10,15,919/- AND OPENING CASH BAL ANCE AS ON 01.04.2015 WAS TAKEN AS RS. 26,13,010/-. HOWEVER, I T IS IMPORTANT TO MENTION THAT AS PER AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT AS ON 31.03.2015 THE CLOSING CASH BALANCE IS OF RS. 76,16,708.71 WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AC. ONCE THE AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO THE AUTHENTICITY OF MANUAL CASH BOOK STAND IN DOUBT. THE APPELLANT AFTER. THE COURSE OF SEARCH COMPLETE ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS INCORPORATING ALL TH E ENTRIES OF SALE AND PURCHASE. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO MENTION THAT THE AO HAS NOT REJECTED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS EVEN AFTER NOTICING SUCH HUGE DISCREPAN CIES AND HAS TAKEN MANUAL CASH BOOK TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT EVEN WHEN T HE OPENING BALANCE IS TAKEN AS WRONG. IF THE OPENING BALANCE IN MANUAL CA SH BOOK WOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN CORRECT AS PER AUDITED BALANCE SHEET FOLLOWIN G PICTURE WILL EMERGES OUT:- S . PARTICULARS AMOUNT 1 . OPENING BALANCE AS PER AUDITED BOOKS OF RS.76,16,708.711 - ACCOUNTS AS ON 01.04.2015 2 LESS: OPENING BALANCE AS PER MANUAL CASH RS.26,13,010/- BOOK AS ON 01.04.2015 , ADD: CLOSING BALANCE AS P ER MANUAL CASH RS. 10,15,919/- : BOOK AS ON 08.08.2015 ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 35 TOTAL CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 08.08.205 RS.60,19,617.711 - HON'BLE ITAT INDORE IN THE CASE OFURMILA AGARWAL VS ACIT (2014) 24 ITJ 785(INDORE) HAS HELD THAT IN CASE WHERE THE CASH BO OK IS PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO- THE SAME NEITHER REJECTED NOR ANY DEFICIENCY PO INTED OUT-NO JUSTIFICATION TO DISALLOW CREDIT OF DAY TO DAY CASH BALANCE. IN THE INSTANT CASE, IF THE AO WOULD HAVE ADOPTED OPENING BALANCE AS PER AUDITED B OOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHICH WERE NOT REJECTED BY HIM, THERE WOULD REMAIN NO DIF FERENCE IN CASH FOUND ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. I. (II) DECLARATION OF ADDITIONAL INCOME BY SHRL SANJAY JAIN:- SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH EXPLAINED THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAD BEEN WRITTEN TILL 30.06.2015 I N TALLY SOFTWARE AND FEW OF THE ENTRIES MADE PRIOR TO 30.06.2015 ARE ALSO NOT ENTER ED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT AFTER RECORDING OF ALL SALES BILLS AND AFTER MAKING OTHER POSTINGS TILL 20 .08.2015 THE CASH BALANCE WOULD WORK OUT AROUND 40-45 LAKHS AND REGARDING PHY SICAL CASH FOUND IN EXCESS TO 25-30 LAKHS HE IS UNABLE TO EXPLAIN THE S AME. ANOTHER STATEMENT OF SHRI SANJAY JAIN. WAS RECORDED ON OATH WHEREIN HE W AS CONFRONTED WITH THE MANUAL CASH BOOK. HE IN REPLY HAS ACCEPTED ADDITION AL INCOME OF RS. 60,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS CASH FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. IT IS SEEN THAT STATEMENT GIVEN BY BOTH SHRI SHIKAR CHAND JAIN AND SHRI SANJAY JAIN WERE ON THE BASIS OF SEIZED MANUAL CASH BOOK A ND NOT AS PER TRUE AND CORRECT FACTS OF THE CASE WHICH IS ALSO ONE OF THE REASONS FOR RETRACTION MADE BY THE APPELLANT FROM DISCLOSURE MADE BY SHRI SANJA Y JAIN. THEREFORE, THE SAME CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS RELIABLE AND CORRECT. HOWEVER, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS- WERE_ COMPLETED BY THE APPELLANT~ AND WER E ALSO EXAMINED BY THE AD AND NO SPECIFIC DEFECT OR DISCREPANCY WAS FOUND BY THE AO. THUS, IT CAN SAFELY BE PRESUMED THAT THE CASH IN HAND AS PER BOO KS OF ACCOUNTS IS CORRECT. 5.6,3 IN , VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE AO WAS FIRSTLY NO JUSTIFIED IN PRESUMING THAT THE DECLARATION MADE BY PARTNER ON HIGHER SIDE IS THE EXACT AMOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH WHICH WAS FOUND DURING T HE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE AO OUGHT TO HAVE PROVIDED SUFFICIENT REASONING BEHIND DROPPING THE DECLARATION MADE BY SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN OF RS 2 5 -30 LAKHS. SECONDLY, NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN REJECTED BY THE AO. THIRDLY, THE OPENING BALANCE AS PER MANUAL CASH BOOK AND AUDITED CASH BO OK IS DIFFERENT. MY FINDINGS ARE CONSIDERATE AND BASED ON DISCUSSION IN ABOVE PARAS. THUS, ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS. 60,00,000/ - IS DELETED. THEREFORE APPEAL ON THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 36 30. FROM PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE FINDING OF FACT GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS DETAILED SUBMISSION MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS WHICH REMAINS UNCONTR OVERTED BY LD. DR, WE FIND THAT OPENING BALANCE OF CASH IN HANDS A S ON 01.04.2015 IN THE AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WAS RS.76,16,708/- BUT IN THE MANUAL CASH BOOK THE BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2015 WAS T AKEN AT RS.26,13,010/- WHICH WAS MARKED IN PENCIL. SINCE TH E AUDIT FOR F.Y. 2014-15 WAS UNDERGOING WHEN THE SEARCH TOOK PLACE O N 21.08.2015, THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY COMPLETED BOOKS OF ACCOUN T, GOT THEM AUDITED AND PRODUCED SUCH AUDITED BOOKS BEFORE LD. AO. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NO ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE DURING A.Y. 2015-16 FOR THE ALLEGED CASH IN HANDS S HOWN AS ON 31.03.2015. THUS LD. AO HAS NEITHER BROUGHT ON RECO RD ANY DEFICIENCY IN THE BOOKS PRODUCED NOR HAS REJECTED BOOKS OF ACC OUNT. THEREFORE LD. AO SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THE OPENING BALANCE O F CASH IN HANDS AS ON 01.04.2015 OF RS.76,16,708.71/-. ON CONSIDERI NG THE OPENING BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2015 AT RS.76,16,708/- THE ALLE GED UNEXPLAINED CASH STANDS EXPLAINED. THUS, NO INTERFERENCE IS CAL LED FOR IN THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.6 0,00,000/- GROUND NO.3 RAISED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 37 31. GROUND NO.4 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS.2,25,544/- MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT BASED ON THE S EIZED DIARY BS44 PAGE 11 FOR THE ALLEGED MONEYLENDING BUSINESS. 32. WE OBSERVE THAT IN SEIZED DIARY BS-44 LIST OF NAME AMOUNT AND DATES WERE APPEARING. BEFORE LD. AO IT WAS SUBMITTE D THAT THE SAME IS A LIST OF DEBTORS. LD. AO REFUSED TO ACCEPT. THE AS SESSEE FILED AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AND THE ENTRIES RELATING TO DEBTORS. THESE DETAILS WERE APPRECIATED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE ADDITION OF R S. 2,25,544/- WAS DELETED OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS: 5.2.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EVIDENCES FI LED BY THE APPELLANT AND FINDINGS OF THE AD. THE APPELLANT BEFORE ME HAS STRONGLY CONTENDED THAT THE SAID FIGURES IN SEIZED DIARY BS- 44 AT PAGE NO 11 REPRESENTS OUTSTANDING DEBTORS RECORDED IN REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. FURTHER, BALANCE SHEETS FOR A Y 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17 WERE ALREADY SUBMITTED WITH RETURN OF INCOME FILED ULS 139(1) OF THE ACT. ON PERUSAL OF COPY OF LIST OF OUTSTANDING DEBTORS IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE LIST OF PERSONS WHOSE NAME ARE MENTIONED ON PAGE NO 11 OF THE SAID DIARY ARE LIST OF OUTSTANDING DEBTORS AS ON DATE OF SEARCH WHICH ARE FULLY RECORDED IN REGULAR BOOKS - OF ACCOUNTS. THUS, THE ADDITION MAD E BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS.1,12,QOO/ IN AY 2012-13, RS. 1,92,125/- IN AY 2013-14, RS. 4,70,446/- IN AY 2014-2015 AND RS. 2,25,544/- IN AY 2016-17 IS DELETED. THEREFORE, APPEAL ON THIS GROUND IS ALLOW. 33. WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT THE CONTENTIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND BEFORE US ARE DULY SUP PORTED BY THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET FOR PRECEDING YEARS AND THE A LLEGED NAMES APPEARING IN THE SEIZED DIARY BS-44 ARE NAME OF THE OUTSTANDING ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 38 DEBTORS AND HAVE NO RELATION WITH THE ALLEGED MONEY LENDING BUSINESS. LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS AND DE LETED THE ADDITIONS WHICH THUS NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR. GROUND NO .4 OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS STANDS DISMISSED. 34. GROUND NO.5 RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS. 5,00,000 /- MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT BY THE LD. AO ON THE BASIS OF LOOSE PAPER A S PER DIARY BS-43. 35. BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THIS ISSUE AS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE THAT THESE SEIZED LOOSE PAPERS BELONGS TO A JAIN TRUST AND IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE TRUST ALSO. SINCE THE ENTRIES ON THESE PAPERS DO NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE, THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE LD. A.O. ARE BAD IN LAW. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTE D THAT THE AMOUNT UNDER CONSIDERATION IS SHOWN AS PAYABLE IN THE SEIZ ED PAPER. THE LD. A.O. HAS WRONGLY PRESUMED THAT THE AMOUNT IS PAID. THE PAPER AS A WHOLE SHALL HAVE TO BE READ. NO ADDITION CAN BE MAD E ON THE BASIS OF THE PRESUMPTION. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CORRECTLY DELET ED THESE ADDITIONS. 36. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THIS ADDITI ON OF RS.5,00,000/- OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS: 5.3.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE REASONING OF THE CASE, EVIDENCES FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND FINDINGS OF THE AO. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH LPS-1 'VAS FOUND AND SEIZED WHICH CONTAINS 64 PAGES. THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE COMPLEXITY OF THE ISSUE I FIND IS CONVENIENT TO DIS CUSS EACH PAPER OF LPS-1, ON THE BASIS OF WHICH ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE, INDIVI DUALLY.' MY FINDINGS ON ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 39 THIS ISSUE ARE AS UNDER:- PAGE NO 2 OF LPS-1- DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PAGE NO 2 OF LPS-1 WAS FOUND AND SEIZED. THE SAID LOOSE PAPER HAS NARRATION AT THE TOP 'PANDIT S HIKHAR CHAND JAIN, VIDISHA' AND GIVES BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE IDOLS O F GOD AGAINST WHICH AN AMOUNT OF RS.12,50,000/- IS MENTIONED. A SUM OF RS. 7,50,000/- IS MENTIONED AS PAID WITH RECEIPT NUMBERS ON VARIOUS D ATES AS DETAILED IN THE LOOSE PAPER AND RS. 5,00,000/- IS APPEARING AS BALA NCE PAYABLE. THE APPELLANT BEFORE ME AS WELL AS BEFORE AO HAS CONTEN DED THAT THE SAID LOOSE PAPER DOES NOT HAVE ANY RELATION TO PURCHASE/SALE O F ORNAMENTS AND AS SUCH DOES NOT HAVE ANY RELATION TO THE BUSINESS ACTIVITI ES OF THE FIRM. THE SAID LOOSE PAPER PERTAINS TO MR. SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN WHO IS A P REACHER AND A RENOWNED SPEAKER ON JAIN DHARMA AND REGULARLY GIVES PREACHIN G & SERMONS AT VARIOUS PLACES. HE ALSO PERFORMS POOJA ETC IN TEMPLES AND I S GENERALLY ALSO KNOWN AS 'PANDITJI'. HE IS ALSO PRESENTLY THE VICE PRESIDENT OF A TEMPLE KNOWN AS GYANODAY. TEERTH AND AT THE TIME OF THE SEARCH WAS THE TRUSTEE OF THE SAID TEMPLE. FURTHER, VARIOUS MEMBERS OF THE JAIN COMMUN ITY OF VIDISHA AND NEARBY PLACES HAVE AGREED TO MAKE CONTRIBUTION OF R S. 12,50,000/- FOR INSTALLATION OF IDOLS AT THE TEMPLE MANAGED BY PAND IT TODARMAL SMARAK TRUST, JAIPUR AND THE AMOUNT WAS COLLECTED BY SHRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN ON BEHALF OF THE TRUST. THE AMOUNT COLLECTED FROM VARIOUS DEVOTE ES WAS HANDED OVER TO TRUST AND RECEIPT WAS ISSUED BY THE TRUST. THE APPE LLANT IN SUPPORT HAS FILED CONFIRMATION OF' THE RECIPIENTS AND DETAILS OF RECE IPTS AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH WERE ALSO FORWARDED TO THE AO. THE AO IN REPL Y SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM D OES NOT HAVE ANY RELEVANCE AS THERE IS NO MENTION OF DONATION, DONAT ION RECEIPTS, DONE AND OTHER SUPPORTING EVIDENCES DURING THE COURSE OF SEA RCH. ON PERUSAL OF COPY OF LETTER AND DETAILS OF DONATION RECEIPTS IT WAS FOUN D THAT THE RECEIPTS AS MENTIONED ON THE LOOSE PAPER MATCHES EXACTLY THE SA ME WITH THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BY PANDIT TODARRUAL SMO-AK TRUST, JAIPUR. AS PER LIST SUBMITTED BY THE SAID TRUST THE COLLECTION OF DONATION FROM 22.0 7.2012 TO 31.07.2014 WAS RS. 7,51,000/- AND AMOUNT OF RS. 2,82,500/- WAS REC EIVED FROM 28.08.2014 TO 09.10.2015 AND A BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 2,16,000/ - WAS RECEIVABLE FROM VIDISHA SAMAJ TOTALING TO RS. 12,49,500/- WHICH IS ALMOST EQUALS TO THE AMOUNT MENTIONED ON THE IMPUNGED LOOSE PAPER. THIS CANNOT BE A MERE COINCIDENCE THAT THE DETAILS OF RECEIPT AS MENTIONE D ON THE LOOSE PAPER MATCHES EXACTLY THE SAME WITH DETAILS SUBMITTED BY THE TRUST. ALSO, THE IMPUNGED LOOSE PAPER WAS. FOUND FROM RESIDENCE OF S HRI SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN AND NOT FROM SHOW ROOM OF THE APPELLANT. THUS, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,30,OOOI- IN AY 2013-14, RS. 2,20 ,000/- IN AY 2014-15, RS. 2,00,000/- IN AY 2015- 16 AND RS, 5,00,000/- IN AY 2016-17 ARE DELETED ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 40 37. THE ABOVE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) REMAINS UNCONTR OVERTED BY THE LD. DR AND THE UNDISPUTED FACT EMERGE THAT THE ALLEGED LOOSE PAPERS AS PER THE DIARY BS43 WHICH ARE THE FOUNDATION FOR TH E ADDITION OF RS.5,00,000/- DO NOT BELONGS TO THE ASSESSEE. IT AC TUALLY BELONGS TO JAIN TRUST NAMELY PANDIT TODARMAL SMARAK TRUST. ONE OF THE PARTNERS OF THE FIRM NAMELY SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN IS KNOWN TO B E A PREACHER AND A RENOWNED SPEAKER ON JAIN DHARMA AND ALSO ATTACHED TO THE SAID JAIN TRUST. THESE LOOSE PAPERS REFER TO PURCHASE OF THE IDOLS OF GOD WORSHIPED BY THE JAIN COMMUNITY FOR BEING PLACED IN A JAIN TEMPLE. THEREFORE, UNDER THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE SINCE THE ALLEGED LOOSE PAPER DO NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESS EE FIRM, LD CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION. THE FINDING OF LD CIT(A) NEEDS NO INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO.5 RAISED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 38. THROUGH GROUND NO.6 REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,18,16,751/- M ADE BY THE LD. AO. 39. BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THIS ADDITION AS SUBMIT TED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEAR CH VALUATION OF INVENTORY WHICH COMPRISED OF GOLD AND DIAMOND JEWE LLERY AND SILVER ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 41 ORNAMENTS WAS DONE AND THE VALUE OF INVENTORY WAS D ETERMINED AT RS. 8,71,53,266/-. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSE E WERE INCOMPLETE AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH AND AFTER RECONCILIATION T HE QUANTITY OF STOCK WAS DETERMINED AT 6105.928 GRAMS OF GOLD AND 85.27 KG OF SILVER WHICH WAS VALUED AT RS. 1,52,26,036/-. THE DIFFER ENCE WAS ASCERTAINED AT RS. 7,19,27,190/- WHICH WAS ACCEPTED TO BE SURRENDERED AS UNRECORDED INVESTMENT. SUBSEQUENT TO THE SEARCH THE ASSESSEE GOT ITS BOOKS COMPLETED AND RECONCILED THE STOCKS WITH THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION AND OFFERED TO TAX RS. 3,03,1 0,439/- DETERMINED AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT . DETAILED RECONCILIATION WITH REASONS FOR ADJUSTMENTS IS GIVEN BELOW TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CORR ECTNESS OF THE INCOME OFFERED:- STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH (GOLD AND DIAMOND) 33,853.86GMS. RS.8,10,16,131/- STOCK AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH 6,105.938 GMS. RS.1,33,84,194/- DIFFERENCE 27747.922 GMS RS.6,76,31,937/- DIFFERENCE IN STOCK OF SILVER 157GMS RS.42,95,253/- TOTAL DIFFERENCE IN STOCK RS. 7,19,27,190/- STOCKS SURRENDERED IN THE RETURN (WRONGLY TAKEN BY A.O. AT 3,01,10,439/- 11075 GMS RS.3,03,10,439/- BALANCE ADDITION CHALLENGED 16672 GMS. RS. 4,16,16 ,751/- ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 42 QUANTITATIVE BIFURCATION OF 16672 GMS GOLD ORNAGMEN TS WAS EXPLAINED BEFORE LD. AO IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: I. PERSONAL JEWELLERY OF THE PARTNERS 10987 GMS. II. BILLS ACCOUNTED AFTER THE SEARCH WHEREIN THE PURCHASES WERE MADE BEFORE THE SEARCH 5686 GMS. III. JEWELLERY BELONGING TO SISTER AND BROTHER IN LAW WHILE THEY WERE VISITING TO CANADA 779 GMS. --------------- TOTAL 16672 GMS 40. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. THAT THE P ERSONAL JEWELLERY OF 10987 GMS. BELONGING TO THE PARTNERS WAS KEPT IN TH E SHOWROOM/ RESIDENTIAL PREMISES IS INCLUDED IN THE STOCK TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT. THIS JEWELLERY WAS RECEIVED BY THE MEMBERS FROM THE WILL OF THE MOTHER SMT. CHAMELIBAI. THE SAID JEWELLERY WAS DECLARED BY THE MEMBERS IN THEIR WEALTH TAX RETURNS FILED FOR A.Y. 2011-12 MUC H BEFORE THE DATE OF SEARCH. REGARDING THE BILL RECEIVED AFTER THE SEARC H ALL THE DETAILS WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. INCLUDING THE COPY OF THE BILLS PAYMENT PROOF AND THE COPIES OF ACCOUNTS. REGARDING THE JEWELLERY BELONGING TO THE SISTER, THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE BROTHER-IN-LAW WAS SUB MITTED. 41. HOWEVER THE AO REJECTED THE SUBMISSIONS/EXPLANA TIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 4,18,16,751/- ( RS. 7,19,27,190/-(INCOME DECLARED U/S 132(4) (-) RS. 3, 03,10,439/- (INCOME OFFERED IN THE ITR) IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. THAT ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 43 THE PARTNERS/FAMILY MEMBERS ARE STAYING IN THE SAME PREMISES IN WHICH THE SHOW ROOM OF THE ASSESSEE IS SITUATED. TH E AO IN PARA 7.2 OF HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER HAVE SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED TH AT THE JEWELLERY UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE AND SHOW ROOM. THE STATEMENT OF MR. SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN MADE ON 22.08.1 5 AND THE INVENTORY PREPARED AT THAT TIME AND PLACE MAKES A S PECIFIC MENTION OF THE FACT THAT GOLD JEWELLERY OF 7764.24 GRAMS VALUE D AT APP RS. 1,95,05,738/- WAS FOUND IN THE BED ROOM OF SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN. THE LD. A.O. DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSES SEE. THE LD. AO DISREGARDED THE WILL AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASS ESSEE AND DID NOT MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENT FOR SUCH JEWELLERY AND THE REAS ONS FOR DISBELIEVING THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SU MMARIZED HEREIN BELOW. PARA NO OBSERVATION OF THE AO 7.16 JEWELLERY MENTIONED IN THE W.T RETURN WAS NOT PHYSI CALLY FOUND PROOF OF CONVERSION OF GOLD INTO STOCK IN TRADE WAS NOT FURNISHED ASSESSEE COULD NOT MATCH THE ITEMS IN THE W.T RETUR NS WITH THE STOCK PHYSICALLY FOUND THE ASSESSEE HAS ACCEPTED THE DIFFERENCE IN STOCK A S HIS UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN THE STATEMENT U/S 132(4) ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 44 42. AS REGARDS BILLS ACCOUNTED AFTER SEARCH FOR PUR CHASES MADE BEFORE SEARCH(GOLD) 5685.92 GRAMS & DIAMONDS, RS. 21,94, 174/- FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS ARE MADE BY LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE:- IN SOME CASES OF PURCHASE OF JEWELLERY/DIAMONDS, TH OUGH THE MATERIAL WAS RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH, THE INVOI CES WERE NOT ACCOUNTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. DUE TO THIS QUANTITY OF GOLD PURCHASED REFLECTED IN THESE INVOICE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE BOOK STOCK AND THEREFORE THE DIFFER ENCE IN STOCK CALCULATED WAS NOT CORRECT. SUBSEQUENT TO THE SEARC H THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE COMPLETED, ALL INVOICES WERE BOOKED A ND THE CORRECT QUANTITY OF BOOK STOCK WAS DETERMINED AND THEREAFTE R THE DIFFERENCE IN STOCK WAS RECOMPUTED AND WAS OFFERED TO TAX. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE DETAILS OF SUCH INVOICES ALONG WITH COPY OF INVOICES AND LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE SUPPLIERS AND TH EIR CONFIRMATIONS WERE FILED. ALL THESE DETAILS WERE HOWEVER REJECTED BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: I. THE ACCOUNTS OF THE SUPPLIERS (RAVIRAJ BULLION & JE WELLERS, ANKUR JEWELLERS, KANAK GEMS, MANSHA JEWELLERS, SHILPI JEW ELLERS, AND PADAMSHREE GOLD) WERE NOT FOUND IN THE SEIZED HARD DISK DATA. II. THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY DURIN G THE COURSE OF SEARCH TO UPDATE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS UP TO THE DA TE OF SEARCH. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 45 III. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE MENTION OF ANY SUCH BILLS DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS AND THUS THE DETAILS F URNISHED ARE AFTERTHOUGHT. IV. IN CASE OF KANAK JEMS MUMBAI IT WAS FOUND BY THE IN VESTIGATION DEPARTMENT MUMBAI DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ON TH AT ENTITY ON 03.10.13 THAT IT DOES NOT CARRY ON ANY ACTUAL BUSIN ESS AND THE BUSINESS PREMISES WERE FOUND VACANT. V. THERE WERE SOME DISCREPANCIES IN THE ENTRIES APPEAR ING IN THE SEIZED HARD DISK IN COMPARISON WITH THE DETAILS SUB MITTED ON 12.12.2014. 43. AS REGARDS JEWELLERY BELONGING TO SISTER AND BR OTHER IN LAW WEIGHING 779.64 GRAMS, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE FOLLOWING SUBMISSION MADE: MRS. MEENA JAIN IS THE SISTER OF THE PARTNERS OF TH E ASSESSEE FIRM AND MR. ASHOK JAIN IS HER HUSBAND AND MRS. MEENA JAIN IN TENDED TO GO TO CANADA TO MEET HER DAUGHTER AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING VISA SHE HAD REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE FIRM TO GIVE A VALUATION REPORT OF THE JEWELRY OWNED BY HER FAMILY AND WITH THIS OBJECT SHE HAD BROUG HT HER JEWELRY TO THE ASSESSEE FIRM. AS SHE HAD PLANNED TO LEAVE F OR CANADA AFTER OBTAINING THE VISA SHE HAD KEPT HER JEWELRY WITH HE R FATHER/BROTHERS FOR SAFE KEEPING WHICH WAS KEPT IN THE BUSINESS/RES IDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE QUANTUM OF JEWELRY BELONGING T O THE LADY AND HER HUSBAND IS READILY VERIFIABLE FROM THE COPY OF VALUA TION REPORT OF HER ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 46 JEWELRY DATED 12.05.2015 SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH (LPS-1 PAGE NO 23-24). THE SAID LADY LEFT FOR CANADA ON 29. 07.2015 AND RETURNED BACK TO INDIA ON 27.10.2015 AND THIS FACT IS ALSO READILY VERIFIABLE FROM THE COPY OF HER PASS PORT. DURING P OST SEARCH ENQUIRIES THIS FACT WAS BROUGHT TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE INVEST IGATION WING WHICH ISSUED SUMMONS TO THE SAID PERSONS AND DULY RECORDED THEIR STATEMENT IN WHICH BOTH THE PERSONS CONFIRMED THESE FACTS. THE Y ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT BEFORE THE INVESTIGATION WING CONFIRMING THESE FACTS. THE COPY OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE A SSESSEE. 44. WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) A LL THE NECESSARY DETAILS WERE FILED. THE AFFIDAVITS OF THE SUPPLIER OF THE JEWELLERY WERE ALSO FILED. THE AFFIDAVITS OF THE ADVOCATE, THE EXE CUTOR AND THE WITNESSES IN RESPECT OF THE WILL OF SMT. CHAMELIDEV I WERE ALSO FILED. THE AFFIDAVITS OF SMT. MEENA JAIN AND HER HUSBAND A LONG WITH THE SUMMONS ISSUED WERE FILED. ALL THESE PAPERS ALONGWI TH AN APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) (PG .33 OF THE PB). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ADMITTED THESE PAPERS, AND WERE SENT TO THE LD. A.O. FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE REMAND REPORT WAS SUBMITTED ON 06 /05/2019 (PG.38 OF LD. CIT(A) ORDER).THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER C ONSIDERING ALL THE PAPERS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. AND BEFORE HIM UNDER RULE 46A HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL GIVING THE COMPLETE REASONIN G. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 47 45. WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT LD. CIT(A) AFTER EXAMIN ING THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS EXT ENSIVELY DEALT WITH THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND DELETED THE IMPUGNED ADDI TION OBSERVING AS FOLLOWS: 5.6 GROUND NO.6 FOR A.Y. 2016-17:- THROUGH THIS GR OUND OF APPEAL, THE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED ADDITION OF RS.4,18,16,751 /- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED STOCK OF GOLD AND SILVER. DURING THE CO URSE OF VALUATION OF STOCK WAS DONE BY REGISTERED VALUER. THE DETAILS OF VALUA TION REPORT OF REGISTERED ARE AS UNDER :- S.NO ITEM NAME GROSS WT TOTAL VALUE 1 GOLD' AND DIAMOND 33853.86 GMS 8,10,16,1311- 2 SILVER 242.032 KG 61,37,135/- TOTAL 8,71,53,266/- HOWEVER, THE DETAILS OF STOCK AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOU NT OF THE APPELLANT ARE AS UNDER.- S.NO ITEM 'WEIGHT CURRENT MY PURITY VALUE AT CURRENT COST 1 GOLD 6105.928 2740 PER GMS 180% 133841 GMS 2 SILVER 85.27049 KG 36000 PER KG 60% 13,113 42 I TOTAL 152260 36 SHRI SANJAY JAIN WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN HUGE DIFFE RENCE IN STOCK, IN REPLY HE SUBMITTED THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE MAINTAINED TILL 08.0~.201J. HOWEVER, THE SAME ARE MAINTAINED ILL TALLY ONLY TILL 30.0G.2015 DU: TO ILL HEALTH OF ACCOUNTANT. THEREFORE, HE ACCEPTED ADDITIONAL INCOM E OF RS. 7~19,27,190/- AS UNDISCLOSED STOCK OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. HOWEVER, TH E ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED INCOME OF RS. 3,03,10,439/- WHILE FILING RETURN OF INCOME E U/S IS31'. OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR OFFERING LO WER VALUE OF UNDISCLOSED ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 48 INCOME DECLARED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE AS SESSEE IN REPLY SUBMITTED THAT OUT OF TOTAL JEWELLEY 10987 GMS BELONGS TO PAR TNERS AND THE SAME HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN STOCK. BILLS OF JEWELLERY OF 5685. 92 GMS WERE PENDING AS ON DATE OF SEARCH AND WERE RECEIVED AFTER SEARCH. JEWE LLERY OF 448 GMS BELONGS TO SMT MEENA JAIN AND JEWELLERY OF 331.64 GMS BELON GS TO SHRI ASHOK JAIN. THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND THE SAME ACCEPTABLE AND STATED THAT NO SUCH JEWELLERY WAS FO UND AS MENTIONED IN WEALTH TAX RETURN AS PHYSICALLY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PROVE THE CONVERSION OF SUCH GOL D IN STOCK IN TRADE. FURTHER, THE BILLS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER D ATE OF SEARCH ARE RELATING TO PARTIES NOT TRADING WITH ASSESSEE. ALSO, JEWELLERY BELONGING TO SMT MEENA JAIN AND SHRI ASHOK JAIN HAS NOT BEEN CLAIMED' TO H AVE BEEN KEPT IN SHOWROOM OF THE ASSESSEE. 5.5.1 THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS SUBMITTED LATE SMT. CHAMELI DEVI HAD EXECUTED A WILL ON 30.05.2000 MAKING DISTRIBUTION 0: HER ASSETS INCLUDING GOLD/GOLD JEWELLERY AMONG VARI OUS FAMILY MEMBERS. THE WILL WAS DRAFTED BY ADVOCATE MR AJAY KHANERKAR AND VIAS SIGNED IN PRESENCE OF TWO WITNESS SHRI MALUK CHAND JAIN AND SHRI KALYA N MAL JAIN. SMT CHAMELI DEVI DIED ON 04.06.2000. THE BENEFICIARY OF WILL FILED THEIR WEALTH TAX RETURN FOR AY 2011-12 IN WHICH GOLD ORNAMENTS WERE DULY REPORTED. FURTHER, ENTIRE JEWELLEY OF HOUSE AND SHOWROOM WAS MIXED TOG ETHER AND THEN VALUATION WAS DONE. FURTHER, BILLS OF GOLD JEWELLER Y OF 5685.92 GMS WERE PENDING AND APPELLANT IN SUPPORT HAS FILED COPIES O F ACCOUNTS OF SUPF~;'ER3 AND JEWELLERY OF 779.64 GRMS BELONGS TO SMT MEENA J AIN AND SHRI ASHOK JAIN WHO WERE INTENDED TO GO TO CANADA TO MEET THEIR DAU GHTER AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF GETTING VISA SHE WAS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT DETAILS OF HER ASSETS AND NET WORTH. THEREFORE, VALUATION OF HER JEWELLERY WA S DONE ON 12.05.2015 AND JEWELLEY WAS KEPT WITH SHRI SHIKAR CHAND JAIN FOR S ECURITY PURPOSE. 5.5.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EVIDENCES ON RECORD AND FINDINGS OF THE AO. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH VAL UATION OF INVENTORY WHICH COMPRISED OF GOLD AND DIAMOND JEWELLERY AND SILVER ORNAMENTS WAS DONE AND THE VALUE. OF INVENTORY WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 8,71, 53,266/-. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE INCOMPLETE AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH AND ACCORDINGLY QUANTITY OF STOCK WAS DETERMINED AFTER MAKING A RECONCILIATION STATEMENT BY INCORPORATING DETAILS OF KNOWN PURCHAS E/SALES AND THE QUANTITY OF STOCK WAS DETERMINED AT 6105.928 GRAMS AND 85.27 KG OF GOLD AND SILVER RESPECTIVELY WHICH WAS VALUED AT RS. 1,52,26,036/-. AFTER THE COURSE OF SEARCH, THE APPELLANT COMPLETED ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS AND RECONCILED THE STOCK WITH AVAILABLE INFORMATION. THE DIFFERENCE IN STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WAS ASCERTAINED AT RS. 7,19,27,190/- WHICH W AS ACCEPTED TO BE SURRENDERED AS UNRECORDED INVESTMENT BY SHRI . SAN JAY JAIN. HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT WHILE FILING RETURN OF INCOME ULS 153A OF THE ACT HAS OFFERED SUM OF. RS. 3,03,10,439/- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN STOC K. THE APPELLANT IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION HAS EXPLAINED THAT THE RE ASONS FOR VARIATION BETWEEN THE DIFFERENCE DETERMINED DURING THE COURSE OF SEAR CH AND INCOME OFFERED TO ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 49 TAX WAS MAJORLY ON ACCOUNT OF THE FOLLOWING: E. PERSONAL JEWELLERY OF PARTNERS 10937 GRAMS F. BILLS ACCOUNTED AFTER SEARCH FOR PURCHASES MADE BEF ORE SEARCH(GOLD) 5685.92 GRAMS G. JEWELLERY BELONGING TO SISTER AM} BROTHER IN LA W 779.64 GRAMS H. BILLS ACCOUNTED AFTER SEARCH FOR PURCHASES MADE BEFORE SEARCH( DIAMOND) RS.21,94,174/- AFTER CONSIDERING THE PLEA- RAISED BY THE APPELLANT I FIND IT CONSIDERATE TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE IN DEPTH AND WIDE R- . (A) PERSONAL JEWELLERY OF PARTNERS (10987 GMS) THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HAS CLAIMED THAT OUT OF TOTAL JEWELLEY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH JEWELLERY OF 10987 GMS BELONGS TO FAMILY MEMBERS AND PARTNERS OF THE APPELLANT FIRM. THE APPELLANT HAS A LSO EXPLAINED THE ACQUISITION OF JEWELLERY AND STATED THAT MRS. CHAME LI DEVI THE WIFE' OF THE PARTNER MR. SHIKAR CHAND JAIN GOT MARRIED APPX. 65 YEARS BACK AND BELONGED TO AN AFFLUENT FAMILY. SHE GOT MARRIED TO A FAMILY OF JEWELERS AND AS P?R THE PREVAILING CUSTOM IN THE INDIAN SOCIETY GOT SUBSTAN TIAL QUANTITY OF JEWELLERY AS GIFT FROM HER PARENTS AND IN LAWS AND ON OTHER IMPO RTANT OCCASIONS. HOWEVER, SHE DIED ON 04.06.2COO. PRIOR TO HER DEATH SHE HAD EXECUTED A WILL ON 30.05.2000 MAKING DISTRIBUTION OF HER ASSETS INCLUD ING GOLD/GOLD JEWELLERY AMONGST HER VARIOUS FAMILY MEMBERS, TILE WILL WAS D RAFTED BY HER ADVOCATE MR. AJAYKHANERKAR AND WAS SIGNED BY TWO 'W ITNESSES NAMELY MALUK CHAND JAIN & KALYAN 1-1&! JAIN. AS PER THE WI LL, THE ENTIRE ASSET INCLUDING GOLD AND GOLD JEWELLERY WOULD BE DIVIDED .. MOUNT DIFFERENT FAMILY MEMBERS BY HER BROTHER DEVENDRA JAIN. THE ASSETS OF LATE SMT CHAMELI DEVI WERE DIVIDED ACCORDING TO THE WILL AND THE BENEFICI ARIES FIELD THEIR WEALTH TAX RECTUMS IN AY 2011-12 ILL WHICH THE ASSETS RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF EXECUTION OF WILL WERE ALSO REPORTED. THE APPELLANT IN SUPPOR T HAS FILED COPIES OF WEALTH TAX RETURN OF FAMILY MEMBERS FOR AY 2011-12. FURTHE R, AN AFFIDAVIT FROM MR. DEVENDRA JAIN BROTHER OF LATE SMT CHAMELI DEVI SUBS TANTIATING THE GIFT MADE TO HER AS WELL AS AFFIDAVITS OF MR. AJAY KHANERKAR (THE ADVOCATE WHO DRAFTED THE WILL), MR MALUK CHAND JAIN S: KALYAN MAL JAIN ( THE WITNESSES TO THE WILL) AND MR DEVENDRA JAIN (THE PERSON WHO WAS APPOINTED AS EXECUTOR TO EXECUTE THE WILL AND WHO MADE THE DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS AS PER THE WILL) IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN FILED. A COPY OF THESE AFFIDAVIT WAS FORWA RDED TO AO FOR COMMENTS, HOWEVER, THE AO HAS OBJECTED TO THE SAID PAPERS ON THE FOLLOWING BROAD REASONS:- (I) THE PAPER SUBMITTED DO NOT PROVE THAT JEWELLE Y GIVEN IN WILL IS PART OF STOCK FOUND DURING SEARCH. (II) THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE ANY DETAILS DURIN G THE COURSE OF SEARCH. (III) THE ASSESSEE DID NOT EXPLAIN WHY THE COPY OF WILL W AS NOT FOUND DURING SEARCH. (IV) THE ASSESSEE HAS CONVERTED THE JEWELLERY INT O STOCK, ENTRY OF WHICH IS ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 50 NOT MADE IN BOOKS. (V) THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT MATCH THE LIST OF ITEM S MENTIONED IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURN WITH THE STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE O F SEARCH. (VI) THE WILL IS NOT REGISTERED AND-VARIOUS FACTO RS RAISE SUSPICION THAT T:1 ~ WILL IS FABRICATED AND AFTER THOUGHT. CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE AO IN POINT (I), (II) ANDIIV) IT IS SEEN THAT THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAVE SP ECIFICALLY STATED IN THE STATEMENT THAT THE JEWELLERY OF WIFE/FAMILY MEMBERS OF 10987 GMS IS INCLUDED IN THE STOCK FOR WHICH NO ACCOUNTING ENTRY IS MADE. THE, JEWELLERY UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE AND SHOW ROOM WHICH WAS ALSO CONFIRMED BY MR. SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN IN HIS STA TEMENT RECORDED ON OATH ON 22.08.15. SIMILARLY, SHRI SANJAY JAIN IN HIS STA TEMENT RECORDED 011 22.08.2015, IN REPLY TO Q-53 STATED THAT THE INVEST MENT IN GOLD OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS/CONCERNS WHICH WAS ALSO REPORTED IN THE WEA LTH TAX RETURN HAVE BEEN MERGED IN THE STOCK IN HAND OF THE FIRM FOR WH ICH NO ACCOUNTING ENTRY HAS BEEN MADE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. PERSON WISE DETAILS' OF GOLD ORNAMENT AGGREGATING TO 10987.35 GRAM SO INCLUDED IN THE STO CK WERE ALSO MENTIONED IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED: THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE THE DETAILS OF JEWELLEY OF 10987 GMS. A S REGARD TO OBSERVATION MADE IN (III) & (V) IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AFFI DAVITS OF FOUR PERSONS I.E. ADVOCATE (PREPARER OF WILL), TWO WITNE SS AND EXECUTOR OF THE WILL, CONFIRMING THE GENUINENESS OF THE WILL, HOWEVER, TH E AO DID NOT RAISE ANY DOUBT ON AFFIDAVITS FILED. THE FAMILY MEMBERS AND P ARTNERS HAVE DISCLOSED THE JEWELLERY IN THEIR WEALTH TAX RETURN WHICH \VA3 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE SEARCH. THIS CANNOT BE CALLED A CASE OF AFTERTHOUGH T. IT MAY FURTHER BE APPRECIATED THAT NO ITEM WISE INVENTORY WAS PREPARE D AND THE QUANTIFICATION/VALUATION WAS DONE ON WEIGHT BASIS O NLY IN A LUMP SUD. MANNER AS WOULD BE VERIFIABLE FROM THE COPY OF INVE NTORY/VALUATION SHEET ENCLOSED. THE FACT THAT TOTAL JEWELRY FOUND WITH TH E ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WAS 33853.86 GR AMS WHICL: HAVE TOTALLY BEEN CONSIDERED AS THE STOCK IN HAND OF THE ASSESSE E FIRM IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE FILED THEIR W.T R ETURNS AND HAVE OFFERED THEIR GOLD HOLDING AS ASSETS FOR TAXATION IN IT IS ALSO NOT DISPUTED. THUS IT WOULD NOT BE PROPER TO HOLD THE WILL AS FABRICATED AND AFTERTHOUGHT AS HELD BY THE AO. THUS IT IS HELD THAT THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFI ED IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF 10987 GMS OF GOLD JEWELLERY FROM THE QUANTITY OF ST OCK FOUND (B) BILLS OF PURCHASE OF JEWELLERY PENDING ON THE DATE OF SEARCH (5685.92 GRAMS) THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AS WELL A S BEFORE THE AO HAS STATED THAT BILLS OF VARIOUS PURCHASE OF GOLD AND DIAMOND JEWELLERY ARE PENDING, HOWEVER, MATERIAL WAS RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. THEREFORE, THE QUANTITY OF GOLD PURCHASED REFLECTED BY THESE INVOI CE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE BOOK STOCK AND ACCORDINGLY THE DIFFERENCE IN STOCK CALCULATED WAS NOT CORRECT. THE APPELLANT AFTERWARDS RECEIVED ALL THE INVOICES AND WERE DULY RECORDED IN REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THEREAFTER THE DIFFER ENCE IN STOCK WAS ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 51 RECOMPUTED AND WAS OFFERED TO TAX AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,03,10,439/ . THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO FILED COPIES OF INVOKES RECEIVED AFTER SEARCH. THE AO AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THESE BILLS AND, INVOICES MACE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: I. VI. THE ACCOUNTS OF THE SUPPLIERS (RAVIRAJ BULLION & JEWELLERS, ANKUR JEWELLERS, KANAK GEMS, MANSHA JEWELLERS, SHILPI JEW ELLERS, AND PADAMSHREE GOLD) WERE NOT FOUND IN THE SEIZED HARD DISK DATA. VII. THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH TO UPDATE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS UP TO THE DA TE OF SEARCH. VIII. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE MENTION OF ANY SUCH BILLS DURING THE COURSE, OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS AND THUS THE DETAILS FURNISHED A RE AFTERTHOUGHT. IX. IN CASE OF KANAK JEMS MUMBAI IT WAS FOUND BY TH E INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT MUMBAI DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH' ON T HAT ENTI TY ON 03.10.13 THAT IT DOES NOT CARRY ON ANY ACTUAL BUSINESS AND T HE BUSINESS PREMISES WERE FOUND VACANT. X. THERE WERE SOME DISCREPANCIES IN THE ENTRIES APP EARING IN THE SEIZED HARD DISK IN COMPARISON WITH THE DETAILS SUBMITTED ON 12 .12.2014. WITH REGARD TO OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE AO IT WAS O BSERVED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN DEALING WITH THESE SUPPLIER FROM LONG TIME AND TRANSACTIONS WITH THESE SUPPLIERS ARE ALSO REFLECTE D IN REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE APPELLANT HAS BROUGHT TO MY NOTICE TH AT IT HAS BEEN DEALING WITH FEW OF THE SUPPLIERS SINCE INCEPTION OF THE BU SINESS. THE BRIEF DETAILS OF DEALING WITH THESE SUPPLIERS ARE AS UNDER:- RAVIRAJ BULLION & JEWELLERS SINCE 23.08.2012 ANKUR JEWELLERS SINCE MARCH 2014 KANAK GEMS SINCE SEPTEMBER 2013 JAINA JEWELLERS SINCE 06.02.2012 SHILPI JEWELLERS SINCE INCEPTION OF THE BUSINESS NONETHELESS, THE AO HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PROVIDED VARIOUS OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, HOWE VER, FAILED TO DO SO. THE APPELLANT ON CONTRARY HAS STATED THAT IT WAS NOT PR OVIDED ANY OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE THE BOOKS DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE ASSESSEE WAS MADE TO PREPARE A RECONCILIATION STATEMENT OF THE JEWELLER; BY INCORPORATING DETAILS OF SALES/PURCHASE AVAILABLE IN AN EXCEL SHEET. SHRI SH IKAR CHAND JAIN IN HIS SWORN STATEMENT RECORDED ON OATH ON 22.08.2015 HAS CLEARLY ADMITTED THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE COMPLETED TILL 30.06.2016 AND SOME ENTRIES PRIOR TO 30.06.2015 ARE STILL PENDING AND THEREFORE, HE WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE P&L/BALANCC SHEET/STOCK REGISTER UP TO 20.03.2')15. THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT FOR IN COMPLETE BOOKS WAS THAT ITS AC COUNTANT WAS III AND ON LEAVE. ONCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT IN THE KIND N OTICE OF THE AO THAT VARIOUS BILLS ARE PENDING FROM DIFFERENT PARTIES. T HE AD SHOULD HAVE CONSIDERED THE PLEA AND HAVE PROVIDE THE NECESSARY SET-OFF OR RELIEF . ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 52 THE APPELLANT HAS FILED COPIES OF BILLS/INVOICES RE CEIVED AFTER THE SEARCH. THE BRIEF DETAILS 'OF THESE INVOICES ARE AS UNDER:- INVOICE OF RS. 2,85,857- FOR PURCHASE OF ORNAMENTS FROM M/S PADAMSHREE .GOLD HAD ESCAPED ACCOUNTING AS ON THE DATE OF SEAR CH. THE PAYMENTS TOWARDS THIS INVOICE HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGH CHEQUE ON 08.11.2014 FOR RS. 2,85,857/- THROUGH HDFC BANK ACCOUNT. INVOICE OF RS. 20,01,5611- AND RS. 26,64,945/- DATE D 27.09.2015 & 27.07.2015 RESPECTIVELY FOR PURCHASE OF ORNAMENTS F ROM M/S JAINA JEWELERS HAD ESCAPED ACCOUNTING AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. TH E PAYMENTS TOWARD THESE INVOICES HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGH CHEQUE OF RS. 16,00,0001- ON 23.04.2015, RS. 14,09,0001.: ON 28.07.15 AND 6,00,0 00/- ON 08.07.15 THROUGH HDFC BANK ACCOUNT. INVOICE OF RS. 3,40,000/- DATED 13.08.15 FOR PURCHA SE OF ORNAMENTS FROM M/S RAVIRAJ BULLION & JEWELLERS HAD ESCAPED ACCOUNTING AS OD THE DATE OF SEARCH. THE PAYMENTS TOWARD THESE INVOICES HAVE BEE R. MADE THROUGH CHEQUE OF RS. 3,40,0001- ON 13.08.20!5 THROUGH HDFC BANK ACCOUNT. . THE AO IN PARA 7.17 HAS MADE IN OBSERVATION THAT TH E APPELLANT HAS NO RELATION WHAT SO EVER WITH NILS KANAM JEMS, MUMBAI. HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS SUBMITTE D THAT THE APPELLANT HAS PURCHASED MATERIAL -FROM M/S. KANAK GEMS & JEWELLERY AND TRADERS, (ADDRESS OPP SHRIJI TEMPLE, GOYAL MARKET LAKHERAPURA, BHOPAL ) AND NOT M/S KANAM J EMS, MUMBAI. THUS THE AO HAS FORMED A NEGATIVE OPIN ION ABOUT THIS TRANSACTION SIMPLY ON SIMILARITY IN NAMES OF THE EN TITIES. JEWELLERY/ORNAMENTS WERE ALSO PURCHASED FROM 1-1/S KIRAN DHAORE, MIS MANSA JEWELERS, MIS RAVIRAJ BULLION & JEWELERS, ANK UR JEWELERS, KANAK GEMS, JAINA JEWELERS & SHILPI JEWELERS. THE APPELLA NT HAS FILED COPY OF ACCOUNT OF THESE SUPPLIERS IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSE SSEE ALONG WITH THE CONFIRMATION OF THE SUPPLIERS. FURTHER, THE APPELLA NT HAS FILED COPIES OF AFFIDAVITS OBTAINED FROM MIS KIRAN DHAORE, MIS MANS A JEWELERS, MIS RAVIRAJ BULLION & JEWELERS, ANKUR JEWELERS, KANAK GEMS, JAINA JEWELER S & SHILPI JEWELERS CONFIRMING THE FACT THAT THE ORNAMENTS UND ER CONSIDERATION WERE SUPPLIED AND SOLD BY THEM PRIOR TO 21.08.2015, THE DATE OF SEARCH. A COPY OF THESE AFFIDAVITS WERE ALSO PROVIDED TO THE AO. THE AO' HAS NOT DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE INVOICES AND AFFIDAVITS BUT \VA3 0 F THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT INTENT TO SHOW THE SAME IN B':'0KS OF ACCOUNTS. ON PERUSAL OF COPY OF INVOICES, LEDGER ACCOUNT AND AFFIDAVITS IT WAS OBSERVED THAT PAYMENTS WERE MADE THROUGH CHEQUES AND VARIOUS PAYM ENTS WERE MADE BEFORE THE DATE OF SEARCH WHICH SHOWN THAT INTENTIO N OF THE ASSESSEE IS CORRECT AND IS NOT TO HIDE ANY-PURCHASE. THE REASON OF NON-REFLECTION OF THESE PURCHASE IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WAS THAT THE BILLS AN D INVOICES WERE PENDING FROM THESE PARTIES AND WERE RECORDED WHEN RECEIVED. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN CERTAIN CASES THE ASSESSEE HAD. PURCHASED GOLD BARS WHICH WERE DULLY RECORDED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS. THESE GOLD BARS WERE SENT FOR CONVERSION INTO ORNAMENTS. IN THE CONVERSI ON PROCESS THE ORNAMENTS ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 53 RECEIVED, GAIN IN WEIGHT DUE TO IMPURITIES ADDED FO R MAKING OFF THE JEWELLERY. THUS WEIGHT OF ORNAMENTS RECEIVED IS MUCH MORE THAN THE WEIGHT OF THE GOLD BAR PURCHASED. THIS EXCESS QUANTITY' IN CERTAIN CAS ES HAS ESCAPED, ADJUSTMENT WHILE CALCULATING THE WEIGHT OF THE BOOK S STOCKS WHICH WAS ADJUSTED IN THE RECONCILIATION CHART PREPARED AND S UBMITTED BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE AP PELLANT HAS ALSO FILED COPY OF INVOICES FOR LABOUR CHARGES RECEIVED INCLUD ES THE COST OF MATERIAL ADDED AND IS ACCOUNTED AS LABOUR CHARGES AND DETAIL S OF PAYMENT MADE TOWARDS LABOUR CHARGES AFTER DEDUCTION OF TDS THERE ON. ON PERUSAL OF THESE BILLS AND INVOICES IT WAS FOUND THAT FEW OF THE BIL LS ON WHICH TDS WAS DEDUCTED WERE PAID MUCH BEFORE THE DATE OF SEARCH. THEREFORE, THESE QUANTITIES CANNOT BE TERMED AS AFTERTHOUGHT. THUS IT IS HELD THAT THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MA KING AN ADDITION OF 5685.92 GMS OF GOLD JEWELLERY FROM THE QUANTITY OF STOCK FO UND. (C) -IEWELLERY BELONGING TO SISTER AND BROTHER IN L AW (779.64 GRAMS) THE APPELLANT AT EACH, I.E. DURING POST SEARCH, DUR ING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HAS SUBMITT ED THAT MRS. MEENA JAIN IS THE SISTER OF THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND MR. ASHOK JAIN IS HER HUSBAND AND THE BROTHER IN LAW OF THE PARTNERS. MRS , MEENA JAIN INTENDED TO GO TO CANADA TO MEET HER DAUGHTER AND FOR THE PURPO SE OF OBTAINING VISA SHE HAD REQIRED THE ASSESSEE FIRM TO GIVE A VALUATION R EPORT OF THE JEWELLERY OWNED BY HER FAMILY AND WITH THIS OBJECT SHE HAD BR OUGHT HER JEWELRY TO THE ASSESSEE FIRM. AS SHE HAD PLANNED TO LEAVE FOR CANA DA AFTER OBTAINING THE 1SA SHE HAD KEPT HER JEWELLERY WITH, HER FATHER BRO THERS FOR SAFE KEEPING WHICH WAS KEPT IN THE BUSINESS/RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID LADY LEFT FOR CANADA ON 29.07.2015 AND RETURNE D BACK TO INDIA ON 27.10.2015. DURING POST SEARCH, SUMMONS WERE ALSO I SSUED BY INVESTIGATION WING TO THE SAID PERSONS WHO APPEARED AND STATEMENT WERE RECORDED CONFIRMING THE SAME FACT. AN AFFIDAVIT WAS ALSO FIL ED IN THIS REGARD BEFORE THE INVESTIGATION \VING. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE, AND EVIDENCES ON RECORD THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TRE ATING JEWELLE~ OF SMT MEENA JAIN AND SHRI ASHOK JAIN AS UNDISCLOSED STOCK OF APPELLANT FIRM EVEN WHEN THE VALUATION REPORT OF JEWELLEY OF SMT MEENA JAIN AND SHRI ASHOK JAIN WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE VALUATIO N REPORT CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE JEWELRY OF779.64 GMS BELONGS TO SMT MEENAJ AIN AND SHRI ASHOK JAIN WHICH WAS KEPT WITH SHRI SIKHAR CHAND JAIN (FATHER OF SMT MEENA JAIN) PARTNER OF THE APPELLANT FOR SECURITY REASONS BECAU SE SMT MEENA JAIN WAS TRAVELLING TO CANADA WHICH WAS ALSO VERIFIED FROM C OPY OF PASSPORT FILED BY THE APPELLANT. THUS, THE AO CANNOT BE TOO HARSH ON APPELLANT TO MAKE ADDITION W.R.T JEWELLERY OF SMT MEENA JAIN AND SHRI ASHOK JAIN AND THEREFORE, THE TOTAL QUANTITY OF 'JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE C OURSE OF SEARCH BE REDUCED TO THIS EXTENT. THE APPELLANT BY TAKING AN ADDITIONAL PLEA SUBMITTE D THAT THE RATE ADOPTED FOR DETERMINING THE BOOK VALUE OF STOCK WAS ESTIMAT ED WITH ESTIMATED PURITY OF 80% WHEREAS THE PHYSICAL STOCK FOUND WAS VALUED BY ADOPTING VARYING ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 54 PURITY AS WAS DETERMINED BY THE VALUER. FURTHER, THE PURITY OF THE ORNAMENTS CONSIDERED IN PHYSICAL STOCK AND BOOK STOCK SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AT THE SAME LEVEL AND ACCORDINGLY THE VALUATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AT THE E RATES FOR DETERMINING THE DIFFERENCE IN VALUE OF ST OCK. ALSO, IF THE SAME URITY WOULD HAVE BEEN ADOPTED THE BOOK VALUE OF THE STOCK WOULD HAVE EEN COMPUTED AT RS. 1,67,73,689.AS AGAINST BOOK VALUE C OMPUTED AT RS. 1,52,26,036/-AS DETAILED BELOW: I. BOOK RATE CORRECT VALUE CORRECT QUANTITY ADOPTED RATE CALCULATED VALUE GOLD/DIAMOND 6105.92 8 2192 2393 13384194 14611485 SILVER 85.2704 9 21600 25537 1841842 2162204 TOTAL 15226036 16773689 THE PLEA RAISED BY THE APPELLANT SEEMS VERY GENUINE AND THEREFORE, THE AO IS. DIRECTED TO COMPUTE VALUATION ON DIFFERENCE OF STOC K. 5.5.3 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE AO IS DI RECTED TO REDUCE THE TOTAL JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH BY 10987 GNNS (ON ACCOUNT OF JEWELLERY OF PARTNERS/FAMILY MEMBERS), 5285.92 GMS (ON ACCOUNT O F PURCHASE BILLS RECEIVED AFTER SEARCH) AND 779.64 GMS (JEWELLERY PERTAINS TO SMT M EENA JAIN AND SHRI ASHOK JAIN). THUS, ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS. 4,18,16,751/- IS DELETED. THEREFORE, APPEAL ON THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED 46. FROM PERUSAL OF THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) WE FIND THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH PROCEEDINGS THE INVENTORY OF GOLD AND SILVER ORNAMENTS AND THE DIAMONDS WAS TAKEN AND THE VALUATION WAS MA DE AT RS.8,71,53,266/-. THIS JEWELRY AND ORNAMENTS WERE F OUND IN THE SHOP AS WELL AS IN THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE PARTN ERS. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE INCOMPLETE AS ON THE DATE OF THE SEAR CH AND THE STOCK WAS SHOWN IN THE BOOKS AT 6105.938 GMS. THE ACTUAL STOCK OF THE GOLD ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 55 ORNAMENTS WAS FOUND AT 33,853 GMS. REVENUE HAS CHAL LENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 4,18,16,751/- CALCULATE D IN THE FOLLOWING MANNERS: STOCK FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH (GOLD AND DIAMOND) 33,853.86GMS. RS.8,10,16,131/ - STOCK AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH 6,105.938 GMS. RS.1,33,84,194/ - DIFFERENCE 27747.922 GMS RS.6,76,31,937/ - DIFFERENCE IN STOCK OF SILVER 157GMS RS.42,95,253/- TOTAL DIFFERENCE IN STOCK RS. 7,19,27,190/ STOCKS SURRENDERED IN THE RETURN (WRONGLY TAKEN BY A.O. AT 3,01,10,439/-) 11075 GMS RS.3,03,10,439/ - BALANCE ADDITION CHALLENGED 16672 GMS. RS. 4,16,16,751/ 47. BIFURCATION OF THE ALLEGED QUANTITY OF GOLD ARN AMENTS WEIGHING 16672 GMS IS AS FOLLOWS: IT WAS EXPLAINED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. THAT THE STOCK OF 16,672 GMS IS EXPLAINED AS UNDER: I. PERSONAL JEWELLERY OF THE PARTNERS 1098 7 GMS. II. BILLS ACCOUNTED AFTER THE SEARCH WHEREIN THE PURCHASES WERE MADE BEFORE THE SEARCH 5686 GMS. III. JEWELLERY BELONGING TO SISTER AND BROTHER IN L AW WHILE THEY WERE VISITING TO CANADA 779 GMS. --------------- TOTAL 16672 GMS ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 56 48. AS REGARDS THE PERSONAL JEWELLERY OF PARTNERS W EIGHING AT 10987 GRAMS WE NOTICE THAT MR. SHIKHAR CHAND JAIN IN HIS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT RECORDED ON 21.08.15 IN REPLY TO QUESTION 6 HAS STATED THAT THE JEWELRY OF HIS WIFE HAS ALSO BEEN KEPT IN THE S HOW ROOM. THE PARTNER SANJAY JAIN IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED ON 22 .08.2015 HAVE ALSO MADE A STATEMENT IN REPLY TO Q-53 THAT THE INV ESTMENT IN GOLD OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS/ CONCERNS WHICH WAS ALSO REPORTE D IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURN HAVE BEEN MERGED IN THE STOCK IN HAND OF THE FIRM FOR WHICH NO ACCOUNTING ENTRY HAS BEEN MADE IN THE BOOKS OF A CCOUNT. PERSON WISE DETAILS OF GOLD ORNAMENT AGGREGATING TO 10987. 35 GRAM SO INCLUDED IN THE STOCK WERE ALSO MENTIONED IN THE ST ATEMENT RECORDED. JEWELRY FOUND IN THE SHOW ROOM/RESIDENCE WAS ACCUMU LATED AT ONE PLACE AND INVENTORY CUM VALUATION WAS DONE, NO ITEM WISE INVENTORY WAS PREPARED AND THE QUANTIFICATION/VALUATION WAS D ONE ON WEIGHT BASIS ONLY IN A LUMP SUM MANNER AS VERIFIABLE FROM THE COPY OF INVENTORY/VALUATION SHEET (PG. 382-385 OF THE PB-II I). THE FACT THAT TOTAL JEWELRY FOUND WITH THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMI LY MEMBERS DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH WAS 33853.86 GRAMS WHICH HAVE TOTALLY BEEN CONSIDERED AS THE STOCK IN HAND OF THE ASSESSEE FIR M IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE PARTNERS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE FILED THEIR WEALT H TAX RETURNS AND ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 57 HAVE OFFERED THEIR GOLD JEWELLERY AS ASSETS FOR TAX ATION WHICH IS NOT IN DISPUTE. IT IS A WELL KNOWN FACT THAT IN ANY INDIAN FAMILIES THE LADIES GENERALLY GET THEIR JEWELLERY CHANGED IN THEIR SHAP E AND FORM FROM TIME TO TIME. THUS NO ADVERSE INFERENCE CAN BE DRAWN FRO M THE FACT THAT THE JEWELRY FOUND WAS NOT MATCHING WITH THE JEWELLERY S HOWN IN THE TAX RETURN. IN SUPPORT OF CONTENTIONS FOLLOWING JUDGMEN TS/DECISIONS ARE RELIED:- A. SUBHASH AGARWAL V ACIT (IT-455 /IND/2013) INDORE BENCH IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT CHANGE IN JEWELRY FOUND VIS A VIS DECLARED TO THE DEPARTMENT- GOLD FOUND LESS- DIAMONDS FOUND MOR E- CAN BE SET OFF AGAINST EACH OTHER. B. ARJUNDAS KALWANI, 102 TTJ 977 (JODHPUR BENCH) IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SIMPLY BECAUSE THE ITEMS OF T HE ORNAMENTS DO NOT TALLY WITH THE ITEMS SHOWN IN THE INVENTORY PRE PARED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH AND THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT LEAD EVIDENCE OF CONVERSION OR REMAKING OF JEWELLERY, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT JEWEL LERY TO THIS EXTENT WAS UNEXPLAINED. C. RAKESH R. PUROHIT, 14 DTR 414 (JAIPUR BENCH) ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 58 IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT JEWELLERY DISCLOSED BY THE AS SESSEE IN PAST CANNOT BE LOST SITE IN VIEW OF THE NON-AVAILABILITY OF ITEM-WISE TALLY. 49. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIREC T TAXES HAS ISSUED GUIDELINES/ INSTRUCTION NO. 1916 DATED 11TH MAY, 19 94. INSTANCES OF SEIZURE OF JEWELLERY OF SMALL QUANTITY IN THE COURS E OF OPERATION UNDER SECTION 132 HAVE COME TO THE NOTICE OF THE BOARD. T HE QUESTION OF A COMMON APPROACH TO SITUATION WHERE SEARCH PARTIES C OME ACROSS ITEMS OF JEWELLERY HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY THE BOARD AND FOL LOWING GUIDELINES ARE ISSUED FOR STRICT COMPLIANCE. IN THE CASE OF A WEALTH TAX ASSESSEE, GOLD JEWELRY AND ORNAMENTS FOUND IN EXCESS OF THE G ROSS WEIGHT DECLARED IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURN ONLY NEEDS TO BE SEIZED. VARIOUS HIGH COURTS, RELYING ON THE ABOVE REFERRED INSTRUCTIONS OF THE CBDT, HAS CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT THE POSSESSION OF THE JEWELL ERY AND ORNAMENTS TO THE EXTENT OF THE QUANTITIES SPECIFIED IN THE IN STRUCTION IS TO BE TREATED AS REASONABLE AND THEREFORE EXPLAINED AN D SHOULD NOT BE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ADDITIONS IN ASSESSMENT OF TH E TOTAL INCOME OF A PERSON. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 59 50. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 1 1.05.1994, SETTLED JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, WILL OF LATE CHAMELI DEVI, WEA LTH TAX RETURNS FOR A.Y..2011-12 OF THE BENEFICIARIES REFERRED IN THE W ILL, AFFIDAVIT OF DEVENDERA JAIN BROTHER OF LATE CHAMELI DEVI SUBSTAN TIATING THE GIFT AND THE STATEMENT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ARE S UFFICIENT ENOUGH TO EXPLAIN THE JEWELLERY OF 10987 GRAMS WHICH WAS INCL UDED IN THE STOCK OF INVENTORY BUT NOT ACCOUNTED IN THE BOOKS AS THEY WERE PERSONAL ASSETS OF THE PARTNERS AND NOT OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM . FURTHER IN LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE US WHICH WERE ALSO PLACED BEFORE LOWER AUTHORITIES WHICH ARE OF THE DATES PRECEDING TO THE DATE OF SEARCH IT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE AN AFTERTHOUGHT SUBMISSION TO EXPLAIN THE GOLD ORNAMENTS WEIGHING 10987.35 GRAMS. 51. WE, THEREFORE, ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES IN ACCEPTING THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE THAT THE ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED STOCK OF GOLD ORNAMENT WEIGHING 10987 GMS IS THE PERSONAL JEWELLE RY OF PARTNERS AND IS THEREFORE DULY EXPLAINED. 52. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION FOR VALUE OF 5686 GMS OF GOLD JEWELLERY CLAIMED TO BE PURCHASED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH BUT BILLS ACCOUNTED FOR AFTER THE DATE OF SEARCH AND ADDITION BEING DEL ETED BY LD. CIT(A), WE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 60 FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING D ETAILS WHICH COMMONLY STATES THAT THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE PRIOR T O THE DATE OF SEARCH BUT THE BILLS WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENT TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. THE DETAILS OF SUCH INSTANCE ARE ME NTIONED BELOW: I. INVOICE OF PADAMSHREE GOLD DATED 12.11.2014 FOR RS. 2,85,857/- HAD ESCAPED ACCOUNTING AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH AN D WAS SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE PA YMENT FOR THIS PURCHASE WAS MADE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE DATED 08.11.2014 FOR RS. 2,85,857/- DRAWN ON HDFC BANK (0 086). (110 GRAMS) II. INVOICE OF JAINA JEWELERS FOR RS. 20,01,561/- A ND RS. 26,64,945/- DATED 29.07.2015 AND 27.07.2015 RESPEC TIVELY HAD ESCAPED ACCOUNTING AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH AND WAS PRODUCED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WHICH PAY MENT OF RS. 16,00,000/- WAS MADE ON 23.04.2015, RS. 14,00,000/- WAS MADE ON 28.07.15 AND 6,00,000/- WAS MADE ON 08.07.15 TH ROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES DRAWN ON HDFC BANK. (1147 GRA MS) (854.200) (PG.451 AND 451A OF PB) III. INVOICE OF RAVIRAJ BULLION & JEWELLERS DATED 1 3.08.15 FOR RS. 3,40,000/- HAD ESCAPED ACCOUNTING AS ON THE DATE O F SEARCH AND WAS SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, TH E PAYMENT FOR THIS PURCHASE WAS MADE BY RTGS THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 61 CHEQUE DATED 13.08.15 FOR RS. 3,40,000/- DRAWN ON H DFC BANK .(131 GRAMS) (PG.451B) IV. KIRAN DHAORE 80.712 GRAMS DATE OF PURCHASE 27/0 4/2015 PAYMENT MADE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. V. ANKUR JEWELLERS GUNA BILL DATED 14/05/2015 AND 1 9/08/2015 PAYMENT MADE THROUGH BAKING CHANNEL RS.17,72,494/- (842.440 GRAMS) (PG.454) AND RS.39,08,632/- ( 1825.440 GRAMS ) (PG.458) SHIPLI JEWELERS MUMBAI BILL DATED 18/08/2015 PAYMEN T MADE THROUGH CHEQUE RS.9,15,865/- (409 GRAMS) (PG.457) V. DIAMONDS PURCHASED FROM MANSHA JEWELERS, ALANKAR JEWELLERS AND KANAK JEMS WERE PRIOR TO THE SEARCH BUT ACCOUNT ED FOR AFTER THE SEARCH. 53. WE FURTHER FIND THAT ALL THE ABOVE STATED BILLS ALONG WITH COPY OF INVOICES OF THE SUPPLIERS, DETAILS OF PAYMENTS MADE AND CONFIRMATIONS RECEIVED FROM SUPPLIERS WERE PLACED BEFORE THE LD. AO. WHO FAILED TO FIND ANY DISCREPANCY OR INACCURACY IN THE ABOVE SA ID DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BEFORE US. UNDER THESE GIVEN FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LD. CI T(A) AFTER APPRECIATING THE FACTS BROUGHT ON RECORD AND IN LIG HT OF SUFFICIENT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES HAS RIGHTLY ACCEPTED THE EXPL ANATION OF THE JEWELLERY WEIGHING 5686 GMS AND THUS RIGHTLY DELETE D THE ADDITION FOR ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED STOCK. ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 62 54. AS REGARDS JEWELLERY BELONGING TO SISTER AND BR OTHER IN LAW WEIGHING 779.64 GMS WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSION S MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) THAT THIS JEWELL ERY WEIGHING 779.64 GMS BELONG TO SMT. MEENA JAIN AND ASHOK JAIN WHO IN TENDED TO GO TO CANADA AND THE SAME IS VERIFIABLE ON THE COPY OF PA SSPORT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS, NO ADDITION WAS CALLED FOR UNEXPLAI NED JEWELLERY 779.64 GMS. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT DURING THE CO URSE OF SEARCH VALUATION REPORT OF JEWELLERY IN THE NAME OF MS. ME ENA JAIN AND ASHOK JAIN WAS FOUND WHICH CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE JEW ELLERY OF 779.64 GMS BELONGED TO THEM. THUS, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) DELETING ADDITION FOR UNEXPLAINED GOLD ORNAM ENTS WEIGHING 779.64 GMS. 55. WE THUS, IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND IN VIEW OF THE DISCUSSION HEREINABOVE FIND NO REASON T O INTERFERE IN THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) WHO HAD EXAMINED THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN DETAIL AND DELETED THE ADDITION OF UNACCOUNTED STOCK OF RS .4,18,16,751/- WHICH COMPRISED OF THE ALLEGED UNACCOUNTED STOCK OF 10987 GMS ON ACCOUNT OF JEWELLERY OF PARTNERS/FAMILY MEMBER, 568 5.92 GRMS ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE BILLS RECEIVED AFTER SEARCH AND 779.64 GMS ALANKAR JEWELLERS ITANO.838/IND/2019& IT(SS)NO.205/IND/2019 63 BELONGING TO MS. MEENA JAIN AND ASHOK JAIN. THUS, G ROUND NO.6 RAISED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 56. AS A RESULT, ALL GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 57. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEES IN ITANO.838/IND/2018 IS ALLOWED AND APPEAL FILED BY T HE REVENUE IN IT(SS)ANO.205/IND/2019 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED AS PER RULE 34 OF I.T.A.T., RULES 1963 ON 01.09.2021. SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) SD/- (MANISH BORAD) VICE PRESIDENT A CCOUNTANT MEMBER INDORE; DATED :01/09/2021 PATEL/PS COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUA RD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INDORE