The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITSSA 25/AHD/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0795 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2024
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUDHENDU DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: M. J. SHAH; RUSHIN PATEL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; TDS; Bogus
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 132; 68; 13; 153C; 133A; 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T( SS) .A. No. 25/ Ahd/2023 ( नधा रण वष / Assess ment Ye ar : 2015-16) De pu ty Co mmi ss i on er of In co me T ax Ce ntr al C ir cle - 1 (3 ), Ah me da bad बनाम/ V s . M / s. De sa i I mp ex Pv t. Lt d. 40 7, 4 t h Fl oor , Si g ma Cee ja y L e ga c y, N r. Pa nja ra P ol e Cr os s Ro ad s, Gu lba i Te kr a, Ah m eda ba d 38 00 15 थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./P A N / G IR N o . : A A BC D 4 3 2 7 M (Appellant) . . (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT. DR Assessee by : Shri M. J. Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, A.R. D a t e o f H e a r i n g 14/02/2024 D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t 29/02/2024 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed at the instance of the Revenue is directed against the order dated 16.12.2022 passed by the Co mmissioner of Inco me Tax ( Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad [ ‘the CIT( A) ], arising out of the order dated 28.12.2018 passed by the DCI T, Central Circle - 1(3), Ahmedabad, under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Inco me Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act ’) for Assess ment Ye ar 2015-16 with the following grounds: IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 2 – “1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in giving relief to the assessee by holding that no incriminating materials were found with regard to the issue on which additions were made in the assessment order because an SLP on this issue is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court?" 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition on account of unexplained entries in seized/impounded materials of Rs.18,99,178/-. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. C!T(A) erred in deleting the addition on account of unexplained cash deposits in bank account u/s 68 of the Act of Rs.99.86,236/-. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of unexplained credit entries of Rs.7,77,045/- 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld, CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of Rs.61,90,847/- . 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.ClT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the AO.” 2. Ground No.1 relates to granting relief to the assessee on the ground of not having been found any incri minating materials with regard to the issue on which the additions were made as SLP is pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court on the identical issue. The CIT( A) ’s order of such granting relief on this issue is, thus, being questioned. The Ld. DR failed to show any order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court staying proce eding before the Hon’ble High Court or Tribunal on identical issue in the absence of which, this ground of appeal is found to be frivolous and dis missed. 3. Ground No.2 relates to addition in respect of unexplained entries in seized/impounded materia ls of Rs.18,99,178/-. 4. The brief facts leading to this case is this that a search and seizure action was carried out in the case of one Shri Mahendra Shantilal Patel (hereinafter referre d to as ‘MSP ’) and his group IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 3 – concern on 06.02.2017. During the course of such search under Section 132 of the Act at his residence evidences were i mpounded wherefro m it wa s found by the authorities that the said MSP through web of concerns, run and operated by hi m, was engaged in providing accommodation entries of various nature and pro minently acco mmodation entries of bogus bills. Such activities were also accepted by the said MSP as his state ment recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act using 5 PANs as per the Revenue authority. The Ld. AO quantified unexplained transaction to the tune of Rs.21,36,56,070/- for A.Ys. 2015-16 to 2017-18. The details whereof is as follows: Sr. No. Annexure A.Y. Amount of unexplained transaction (In Rs.) 1. Annexure - A/1 2015-16 18,99,178 2 Annexure-A/1 2016-17 14,87,533 3. Annexure - A/2, Page - 1 2017-18 3,36,00,000 4. Annexure - A/2, Page - 5 to 7 2017-18 2,75,00,000 5. Annexure - A/2, Page -23 2017-18 15,61,687 6. Annexure - A/2, Page - 59 2017-18 1,23,16,333 7. Annexure - A/2, Page - 67 2017-18 1,66,17,501 8. Annexure - A/2, Page - 68 2016-17 27,88,751 9. Annexure - A/2, Page - 68 2017-18 1,19,68,628 10. Annexure - A/2, Page - 80 2017-18 5,05,500 11. Annexure - A/2, Page - 85 2017-18 11,16,750 12. Annexure - A/2, Page - 91 2017-18 3,25,000 IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 4 – 13. Annexure - A/2, Page - 93 2017-18 8,63,000 14. Annexure - A/2, Page - 94 2017-18 29,09,850 15. Annexure - A/2, Page - 96 2017-18 13,91,325 16. Annexure - A/2, Page - 102 2017-18 9,68,05,034 5. The appellant was found to be one of the beneficiaries and given ample opportunities but as no explanation was submitted b y the assessee alongwith documentary evidence, the addition to the tune of Rs.18,99,178/- was made in the year A.Y. 2015-16 which was finally deleted by the Ld. CI T(A). Hence , the instant appeal before us. 6. During the course of appellate proceeding, additional evidences alongwith explanation was submitted by the assessee which was sent to the Ld. AO b y the First Appellate Authority asking for a re mand report. The said re mand repo rt was finall y furnished on 13.12.2021 objecting the ad mission of those additional evidences as a mple opportunities and reasonable time was furnished to the assessee for submitting the sa me during the assessment proceeding without considering the fact that one of the Directors who was diagnosed with Diabetes and Hypertension met with an accident and had undergone surger y during assessment 2018 and due to such chain of events, the n ecessar y details in the scrutiny assessment proceeding could not be filed by the assessee The contents of the re mand report is rep roduced hereinbelow: IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 5 – IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 6 – IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 7 – 7. Against the same , the assessee filed rejoinder dated 18.03.2021 with the following contents: IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 8 – IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 9 – IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 10 – IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 11 – 8. The repl y of the said re mand report was further forwarded to the Ld. AO wher eupon a further re mand report dated 09.05.2022 with the following contents were submitted b y the Ld. AO: IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 12 – IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 13 – 9. So far as the a ddition of Rs.18,99,178/- on account of unexplained entries is concerned, it was pointed out by the Ld . AO in the re mand report that no new evidence on this issue except the loose paper in the for m of cash book for 3 entries, na mel y, Desai Metalinks, Desai I mpex Pvt. Lt d. and Desai Enterprise were submitted b y the assessee. However, such detail doesn’t establish the source of the transaction mentioned in the seized and impounded documents as was the view of the Ld. AO. Further fa ct reveals that on the date of search, the ti me li mit for issuing notice under Section 143(2) of the Act for the year un der consideration had expired, meaning thereby, the yea r under consideration is an unabated year for all purposes for making assessme nt under Section 153A/153C of the Act. Furthermore , the Ld. AO not specified the incri minating IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 14 – material found and/or seized during the course of search action on the basis of which the additions were made. Aft er the careful consideration of the entire set of docu ments and the order passed by the authorities below, it appears that the proceeding under Section 153C of the Act was initiated for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2016-17 on the basis of documen ts pertaining to the assessee found and seized during search action on MSP Gro up on 06.02.2017. Relevant to mention that on the sa me da y, survey action under Se ction 133A of the Act was ca rrie d out at the premi ses of the assessee and books of accounts were i mpounded. During the course of surve y proceeding, incri minating evidences were found and impounded the details of which as narrated by the Ld . AO in the assess me nt order is as follows: Para 3 o f Page 46 of Ld. C IT( A) A n n e x u r e P a g e s C o n t e n t s A - 1 1 - 3 0 2 D e t a i l s o f d a y t o d a y c a s h t r a n s a c t i o n A - 2 1 - 6 2 , 7 6 - 9 5 V a r i o u s t r a n s a c t i o n s A - 2 9 6 D e t a i l s o f c a s h t r a n s a c t i o n o f R s . 1 3 , 1 6 , 1 7 5 / - A - 2 9 7 - 1 0 2 & 6 3 - 7 5 D e t a i l s o f b o g u s t r a n s a c t i o n w i th b o g u s c o n c e r n s o f M S P , n a m e l y K r i s h n a S a l e s C o r p o r a t i o n , S a t y a m T r a d e l i n k , C r y s t a l A g e n c y , S a i E n t e r p r i s e . 10. Thereafter , show cause notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 03.12.2018 was issued to the assessee in regard to the transactions made with the MSP Gr oup mentioned in the books of accounts alongwith the supporting evidences but the assessee did not file any repl y. The addition on the basis of seized document found to be re mained unexplained to the extent of impugned a mount of Rs.18,99,178/- or A.Y. 2015-16 and the same wa s added to the total inco me of the assessee. Howe ver, it appears from P age No.52 IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 15 – of the assessment order that this particular addition was made on the basis of the seized documen t found being Annexure A-1 appearing from Pa ge 1-302 of the seized documents fo und in course of survey took place in assessee’s pre mises and thus having no relation with the documents found and seized during the course of search on MSP Gr oup. Relevant to mention that the other additions made b y the Ld. AO was not on the basis of any seized documents. However, this particular fact has been mistakenly mentioned as i mpounded and seized during search action by the Ld. CI T( A) at Page No.25 of the order i mpugned before us. We c ould ascertain this particular fact fro m the asse ss ment order, at Page No.46 whereof mentions about such evidence being Annexure A-1 appearing fro m Pa ge Nos. 1 to 302 containing the details of day-to- day transactions. It was specifically mentioned that this particular document was fo und and impounded fro m the assessee’s pre mises on survey which is basically a pett y cash book kept by the appellant co mpan y to keep recording of daily miscellaneous expenses and the average balance mentioned therein is approximatel y Rs.25000/- to Rs.30000/-. Moreso, the assessee clai med the said loose papers to be the daily cash book of the assessee Co mpan y, na mel y, Desai Metalinks (DM), Desai I mpex Pvt. Ltd. (DI) and Desai Enterprise (DE). To the utter surprise, we find that the Ld. AO has made addition only in the hands of the assessee co mpan y. He made the entire addition related to the cash deposit in the bank, addition on account of unexplained credits under Section 68 of the Act (difference in closing and opening a mount of trade pa yable creditors) and disallowance on account of non-deduction of TDS under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Ac t without mentioning any live nexus with the incri minating mater ial clai med to have been found IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 16 – during the course of search. We fur ther find that while deleting the i mpugned addition made b y the Ld. AO, the Ld. CIT( A) upon perusal of the entire set of r ecords observed as follows: “ 5 . 1 1 A s r e g a r d t h e a d d i t i o n o f R s . 1 8 , 9 9 , 1 7 8 / - o n a c c o u n t o f d o c u m e n t s f o u n d a n d s e i z e d d u r i n g t h e s e a r c h a c t i o n i s c o n c e rn e d , t h e i s b e i n g d e c i d e d o n m e r i t i n t h e f o l l o w i n g p a r a s . 5 . 1 1 . 1 I n t h i s r e g a r d , i t i s o b s e r v e d f r o m t h e r e j oi n d e r ( s u p r a ) d a t e d 1 8 . 0 3 . 2 0 2 2 t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t h a d f u r n i s h e d p a g e w is e e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e l o o s e p a p e r a d d i t i o n o f R s . 1 8 , 9 9 , 1 7 8 / - w h i c h i s a s p e r P a g e 5 2 a n d P a g e 5 3 o f t h e a s s e s s m e n t o r d e r . I n t h e s a i d r e j o i n d e r , t h e a p p e l l a n t h a s s t a t e d t h a t i n t h e a s s e s s m e n t o r d e r , t h e d e t a i l s o f p a g e n u m b e rs b a s e d o n w h i c h s u c h a d d i t i o n w a s d e t e r m i n e d , i s n o t m e n t i o n e d . B u t i t is o n l y m e n t i o n e d t h a t p a g e n o s 1 t o 3 0 2 o f A n n e x u r e - A / 1 c o n t a i n s p e t t y c as h b o o k k e p t b y t h e a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y t o k e e p t r a n s a c t i o n s o f d a i l y m i sc . e x p e n s e s . T h e a v e r a g e b a l a n c e i n t h e s a i d c a s h b o o k i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y R s 25 , 0 0 0 / - t o R s 3 0 , 0 0 0 / - F u r t h e r , t h e a p p e l l a n t h a s c l a i m e d t h a t t h e i m p u g n ed l o o s e p a p e r s o n r e c o r d a r e d a i l y c a s h b o o k o f t h e a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y i e D e s ai I m p e x ( D I ) a n d a l s o t w o o t h e r s i s t e r c o n c e r n i e . D e s a i M e t a l i n k s ( D M ) a nd D e s a i E n t e r p r i s e s ( D E ) H o w e v e r , t h e A O h a d m a d e o n l y a d d i t i o n i n t h e h a n d s o f a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y , w h i c h i s w r o n g F u r t h e r , t h e a p p e l l a n t h a s c o n t e n d e d t h a t t h e A O h a d a d d e d d a i l y b a l a n c e s w h i l e m a k i n g t h e a d d i t i o n o n t h i s a c c o u n t , w h i c h i s w r o n g i n f a c t a n d i n l a w 5 . 1 1 . 2 I t i s a l s o o b s e r v e d f r o m t h e r e m a n d r e p o r t (s u p r a ) d a t e d 0 9 . 0 5 . 2 0 2 2 t h a t t h e A O h a s s t a t e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t h a s f u r n is h e d t h e c o p y o f l o o s e p a p e r i n t h e f o r m o f c a s h b o o k f o r 3 e n t i t i e s i . e . D M : D e s a i M e t a l i n k s , D I : D e s a i I m p e x P v t . L t d . a n d D E : D e s a i e n t e r p r i s e . H o we v e r , t h e a p p e l l a n t h a s n o t f u r n i s h e d a n y d e t a i l s r e g a r d i n g t h e s o u r c e o f th e s a i d t r a n s a c t i o n . T h u s , t h e A O h a s r e q u e s t e d t o u p h e l d t h e a d d i t i o n m a d e . 5 . 1 1 . 3 T h e r e a f t e r , t h e a p p e l l a n t i n i t s r e j o i n d e r up l o a d e d o n I T B A s y s t e m o n 1 9 . 0 7 . 2 0 2 2 i n w h i c h i t h a s r e q u e s t e d t o d e l e t e t h e a d d i t i o n m a d e b y t h e A D 5 . 1 1 . 4 I n t h i s r e g a r d , o n p e r u s a l o f t h e r e c o r d s , th e u n d e r s i g n e d h a s o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e c l a i m o f t h e a p p e l l a n t i s a c c e p t ab l e b e c a u s e o n p e r u s a l o f t h e s a i d s e i z e d l o o s e p a p e r s n o . 1 t o 3 0 2 , i t i s o bs e r v e d t h a t t h e s a i d p a p e r s w e r e p e t t y c a s h b o o k o f t h e a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y a s w el l a s i t s t w o s i s t e r c o n c e r n s . F u r t h e r , i t i s a l s o o b s e r v e d t h a t o n t h e l o o s e p a p e r , i t wa s c l e a r l y w r i t t e n a s D I , D E & D M w h i c h m e a n s D e s a i I m p e x P v t . L t d , D e s a i E n t e r p r i s e & D e s a i M e t a l i n k s r e s p e c t i v e l y . F u r t h e r , o n p e r u s a l o f t h e c a s h b o o k s a n d s a i d s e i z e d d a i l y p e t t y c a s h b o o k , i t i s o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e e n t r i e s w r i t t e n i n t h e s e i z e d p e t t y c a s h a r e t a l l i e d w i t h ca s h b o o k f u r n i s h e d b y t h e A O I t i s a n u n d i s p u t e d f a c t t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t c a s e w a s a u d i t e d c a s e a n d t h e e n t r i e s i n t h e p e t t y c a s h b o o k f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s m a t c h i n g w i t h t h e m a i n c a s h . b o o k o f t h e a p p e l l a n t . I t i s a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t t o m e n t i o n h e r e t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y h a s f i l e d i t s r e t u r n o f i n c o m e o n t i m e a n d s h o w i n g t o t a l i n c o m e o f R s . 1 7 , 8 4 , 5 9 0 / - F u r t h e r , n o a d d i t i o n w a s m a d e b y t h e A O r e l a t e d t o t r a n s a c t i o n m a d e w i t h M S P f o r t h e a n y a s s e s s m e n t y e a r e x c e p t f o r A Y 2 0 1 6 - 1 7 & A Y 2 0 1 7 - 1 8 w h i c h i s e v i d e n t f r o m t h e a s se s s m e n t o r d e r . I t i s IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 17 – a l s o o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s a r g u m e n t s r e g a r di n g t h e i m p u g n e d l o o s e p a p e r s o n r e c o r d a r e d a i l y c a s h b o o k o f t h e a p p e l l an t c o m p a n y i . e . D e s a i I m p e x ( D I ) a n d t w o o t h e r s i s t e r c o n c e r n i e . D e s a i Me t a l i n k s ( D M ) a n d D e s a i E n t e r p r i s e s ( D E ) h a v i n g f o r c e , a s t h e A O h a d m a d e en t i r e a d d i t i o n i n t h e h a n d s o f a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y . I t i s s e t t l e d l a w t h a t t h e A O c a n n o t m a k e a n a d d i t i o n i n t h e h a n d o f a p p e l l a n t f o r a n y s u c h t r a ns a c t i o n s w h i c h a r e r e l a t e d t o o t h e r a s s e s s e e s i . e . s i s t e r c o n c e r n s o f t h e a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y . F u r t h e r , t h e A O h a d n o t b r o u g h t a n y c o r r o b o r a t i v e ev i d e n c e t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t t h e f i g u r e s m e n t i o n e d i n t h e s e i z e d d o c u m e n t s a r e u n a c c o u n t e d t r a n s a c t i o n s S i n c e , a l l t h e t r a n s a c t i o n s r e l a t e d t o a p p e l l a n t c o m p a n y m e n t i o n e d i n t h e s e i z e d p e t t y c a s h b o o k a r e m a t c h i ng w i t h t h e m a i n c a s h b o o k , t h e a d d i t i o n m a d e b y t h e A D d o e s n o t s u r v i v e T h u s , a d d i t i o n o f R s . 1 8 , 9 9 , 1 7 8 / - m a d e o n t h e b a s i s o f P e t t y C a s h B o o k i s d e l e t e d . ” 11. It was also argued by the Ld. C ounsel appearing for the assessee that the satisfaction note must speaks of the incri minating material seized pertains to assessment order in question. In this regard he has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Singhad Technical Education Society, reported in [2017] 397 ITR 344 (S C), wherein it wa s observed as under: “ 1 8 . T h e I n c o m e - t a x A p p e l l a t e T r i b u n a l p e r m i t t e d t hi s a d d i t i o n a l g r o u n d b y g i v i n g a r e a s o n t h a t i t w a s a j u r i s d i c t i on a l i s s u e t a k e n u p o n t h e b a s i s o f f a c t s a l r e a d y o n t h e r e c o r d a n d , t h e r ef o r e , c o u l d b e r a i s e d . I n t h i s b e h a l f , i t w a s n o t e d b y t h e I n c o m e - t a x A p p el l a t e T r i b u n a l t h a t a s p e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f s e c t i o n 1 5 3 C o f t h e A c t , in c r i m i n a t i n g m a t e r i a l w h i c h w a s s e i z e d h a d t o p e r t a i n t o t h e a s s e s s m e n t ye a r s i n q u e s t i o n a n d i t i s a n u n d i s p u t e d f a c t t h a t t h e d o c u m e n t s w h ic h w e r e s e i z e d d i d n o t e s t a b l i s h a n y c o - r e l a t i o n , d o c u m e n t - w i s e , w i t h t h e s e f o u r a s s e s s m e n t y e a r s . S i n c e t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t u n d e r s e c ti o n 1 5 3 C o f t h e A c t i s e s s e n t i a l f o r a s s e s s m e n t u n d e r t h a t p r o v i s i o n , it b e c o m e s a j u r i s d i c t i o n a l f a c t . We f i n d t h i s r e a s o n i n g t o b e lo g i c a l a n d v a l i d , h a v i n g r e g a r d t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f s e c t i o n 1 5 3 C o f t h e A c t . P a r a 9 o f t h e o r d e r o f t h e I n c o m e - t a x A p p e l l a t e T r i b u n a l r e v ea l s t h a t t h e I n c o m e - t a x A p p e l l a t e T r i b u n a l h a d s c a n n e d t h r o u g h th e s a t i s f a c t i o n n o t e a n d t h e m a t e r i a l w h i c h w a s d i s c l o s e d t h e r e i n wa s c u l l e d o u t a n d i t s h o w e d t h a t t h e s a m e b e l o n g s t o t h e a s s e s s m e n t y e a r 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 o r t h e r e a f t e r . A f t e r t a k i n g n o t e o f t h e m a t e r i a l i n p ar a 9 o f t h e o r d e r , t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t e m e r g e s t h e r e f r o m i s d i s c u s s e d i n p a ra 1 0 . I t w a s s p e c i f i c a l l y r e c o r d e d t h a t t h e c o u n s e l f o r t h e D e p ar t m e n t c o u l d n o t p o i n t o u t t o t h e c o n t r a r y . I t i s f o r t h i s r e a s o n t he H i g h C o u r t h a s a l s o g i v e n i t s i m p r i m a t u r t o t h e a f o r e s a i d a p p r o a c h o f th e T r i b u n a l . T h a t a p a r t , l e a r n e d s e n i o r c o u n s e l a p p e a r i n g f o r t h e r e sp o n d e n t , a r g u e d t h a t n o t i c e i n r e s p e c t o f t h e a s s e s s m e n t y e a r s 2 0 0 0- 0 1 a n d 2 0 0 1 - 0 2 w a s e v e n t i m e b a r r e d . ” IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 18 – 12. In this particular case, the document being Annexure A1 appearing fro m P age Nos. 1-302 c ontaining the details of da y-to- day transactions is not relating to A.Y. 2015-16 neither undisclosed and cannot be said to be incriminat ing, because of the reason that the entries recorded in the audited books of account of the assessee matches with the sa me which has not been able to be controverted by the Ld . DR bef ore us. 13. It appears fro m t he above that it was factuall y found by the Ld. CIT(A) f ro m the documents on record including the seized documents, partic ularly, the entries written in seized petty cash book of the appellant compan y and i mpugned loose papers written as DI, DE & DM was matching with the main cash book of the appellant. The b ooks of accounts of assessee is also audited one. Though, it is also a fact that as the loose papers on record are the petty cash book of the appellant co mpan y and two other sister concerns, the entire addition has been made in the hands of the appellant compan y which is not permissible in the eye of law under the facts and circu mstances of the case. Neither an y corroborative evidence are forthco ming fro m th e Revenue showing the figures mentioned in the seized docu ments are unaccounted transaction, particularly, whe n all the transactions related to the appellant co mpan y mentioned in the seized petty c ash book ma tching with the main cash book, the addition has rightly been held as unsustainable by the Ld . CI T(A), deletion whereof is found to be just and proper so as to warrant interference. Thus, we upheld the order passed by the Ld. CI T( A) . This particular ground of appeal filed b y the Revenue is found to be devoid of any me rit and, thus, dismissed. IT(SS)A No. 25/Ahd/2023 (The DCIT vs. M/s. Desai Impex Pvt. Ltd.) A.Y.– 2015-16 - 19 – 14. So far as the other issue of addition i mpugned before us b y wa y of Ground Nos. 3, 4 & 5, the sa me also flows fro m the basic observation made by the Ld. CIT( A) at Para 5 men tioned therein and on the sa me p retext as deleted by the Ld. C IT( A) i s found to be without any a mbi guity so as to warrant interference. The deletion of addition is therefore upheld. Therefore, Ground Nos. 3, 4 & 5 are also dis missed. 15. Ground Nos. 6 & 7 are general in nature and no order needs to be passed. This Order pronounced on 29/02/2024 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 29/02/2024 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबं धत आयकर आय ु त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. वभागीय $त$न ध, आयकर अपील'य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड- फाईल / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील$य अ%धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad