ACIT, Central Circle-25, V. Subhash Chand Babbar,

ITSSA 225/DEL/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8420 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 07-04-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2005
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K SAMPATH ADV SHRI K SAMPATH
• Keywords: Document seized; Block assessment; Documents seized

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH : H NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH : H NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH : H NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH : H NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACOCUANTANT MEMBER SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACOCUANTANT MEMBER SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACOCUANTANT MEMBER SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACOCUANTANT MEMBER I.T(SS).A. NO.225/DEL./2005 I.T(SS).A. NO.225/DEL./2005 I.T(SS).A. NO.225/DEL./2005 I.T(SS).A. NO.225/DEL./2005 (BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1.4.96 TO 17.10.02) (BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1.4.96 TO 17.10.02) (BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1.4.96 TO 17.10.02) (BLOCK ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1.4.96 TO 17.10.02) ACIT, CEN. CIRCLE 25, ACIT, CEN. CIRCLE 25, ACIT, CEN. CIRCLE 25, ACIT, CEN. CIRCLE 25, VS. VS. VS. VS. SHR SHR SHR SHRI SUBHASH CHAND BABBAR, I SUBHASH CHAND BABBAR, I SUBHASH CHAND BABBAR, I SUBHASH CHAND BABBAR, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. 17/41A, TIAK NAGAR, 17/41A, TIAK NAGAR, 17/41A, TIAK NAGAR, 17/41A, TIAK NAGAR, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN/GIR NO. : AELPB2321L) (PAN/GIR NO. : AELPB2321L) (PAN/GIR NO. : AELPB2321L) (PAN/GIR NO. : AELPB2321L) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. SAMPATH, ADV. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. SAMPATH, ADV. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. SAMPATH, ADV. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. SAMPATH, ADV. REVENUE BY : REENA S. PURI, CIT(DR) REVENUE BY : REENA S. PURI, CIT(DR) REVENUE BY : REENA S. PURI, CIT(DR) REVENUE BY : REENA S. PURI, CIT(DR) ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, JM THIS IS DEPARTMENTS APPEAL FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD FROM 1.4.96 TO 17.10.02, TAKING THE FOLLOWING ROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF `5,80,500 MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED CASH FOUND. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DCASE, THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF `4,20,000 MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT MADE ON RENOVATION OF BUILDI NG AT FARMHOUSE. 2. THE FACTS ARE THAT A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED ON 17.10. 02 AT THE PREMISES OF J.M.D. TRADING CO., A SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEES BROTHER, SHRI VINEET KUMAR BABBAR AND AT THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES NO.25/6, TILAK NAGAR, NEW DELHI. THE FIRST F LOOR OF THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES WAS OCCUPIED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHEREAS T HE GROUND FLOOR THEREOF WAS IN THE OCCUPATION OF THE ASSE SSEES AFORESAID I.T(SS).A. NO.225/DEL./2005 (BLOCK A.YS. : 1.4.96 TO 17.10.02) : 2 BROTHER. THE SEARCH ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE RESIDEN TIAL HOUSE WAS CARRIED OUT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. BY VIRTUE OF ORDER DATED 28.9.04, THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF `5,80,500 IN RESPECT OF CASH FOUND FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF SEARCH AND OF `4,20,000 ON ACCOUNT OF AMOUNT SHOWN PAID/PAYABLE TO THE CONTRACTOR AS PER THE CERTIFICAT E DATED 12.10.02, OF M/S SAGOO & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT. 4. VIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.2.05, THE CIT(A ) DELETED BOTH THESE ADDITIONS. AGGRIEVED, THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPE AL. 5. IN THE SEARCH, DOCUMENTS WERE SEIZED I.E., ANNEXURE A-3, ANNEXURE A5 AND ANNEXURE A15. 6. LD.DR HAS CONTENDED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN D ELETING THE ADDITIONS OF `5,80,500 AND `4,20,000 MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED CASH FOUND AND UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN RENO VATION OF BUILDING AT FARMHOUSE, RESPECTIVELY. 7. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND, H AS PLACED STRONG RELIANCE ON THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 8. APROPOS THE ADDITION OF `5,80,500 MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED CASH FOUND, IT IS SEEN THAT NEITHER THE AO W HILE MAKING THE ADDITION, NOR THE CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE SAME, HA VE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE SEIZED DOCUMENT ANNEXURE A3, THOUG H THE SAME WAS REFERRED TO SPECIFICALLY BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS DOCUME NT COMPRISES PAGES 3 & 4 OF PANCHNAMA ON 17.10.02. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE THE CLOSING CASH BALANCES AS DATED 02.10.02 TO 12.10.02 HAD BEEN BIFURCATED THEREIN, ACCORDING TO THE PLACEMENT, WHE REIN, THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED. THIS, ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, WAS CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT OUT OF THE CASH AS PER SEIZED CASH BOOK ANNEXURE A15, CASH OF `9 LAKHS WAS KEPT BY SHRI VINEET KUMAR BABBAR, THE BROTHER OF HE ASSESSEE WITH THE ASSESSEE. 9. ACCORDINGLY, THIS MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE O F THE AO TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, ON CONSIDERING ALL THE I.T(SS).A. NO.225/DEL./2005 (BLOCK A.YS. : 1.4.96 TO 17.10.02) : 3 EVIDENCES INCLUDING THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS, PARTICULARLY ANNEXURE A3, ON GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 10. THE AMOUNT OF `4,20,000, IT IS SEEN, IS STATED TO H AVE BEEN PAID OUT OF THE AMOUNT OF `5,80,500 CONCERNING GROUND NO .1. BOTH THESE ISSUES ARE, THUS, INTERCONNECTED AND INTER-DEPENDENT. AS SUCH, THE ISSUE REGARDING HE ADDITION OF `4,20,000 IS ALSO REMITT ED TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO BE DECIDED AFRESH, AS ABOVE. 11. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 03.05.2011. SD/- SD/- (K.D. RANJAN) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED, MAY 03, 2011 SKB COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-I, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR/ITAT