Sanjay Prataprai Mehta, Bhavnagar V. The Dy.CIT., Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 34/AHD/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1265 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2024
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 22-11-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORTHEASSESSEETHATHE; FORTHEASSESSEEANDTHEREFORE; WEHOLDTHAT; FORTHEASSESSEETHATHE; SHRISUDHENDUDAS
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRITUSHARHEMANI; KOTHIGROUPAGAINSTACQUISITIONOFTHEPARTNERSHIPFIRM; OBSERVING; THEKOTHIFAMILY
• Keywords: Gift; Bogus

Judgement Text

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण , अहमदाबादनयायपीी INTHEINCOMETAXAPPELLATETRIBUNAL, ‘’B’’BENCH,AHMEDABAD BEFORESHRIWASEEMAHMED,ACCOUNTANTMEMBER And Ms.MADHUMITAROY,JUDICIALMEMBER Sr. No. IT(SS)ANo. Assessment Year NameofAppellantNameofRespondent 1-2. No.34& 30/Ahd/2022 2019-20 & 2020-21 SanjayPrataprai Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:AABPM2791D D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. 3-4. No.55& 38/Ahd/2022 2019-20 & 2020-21 D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. SanjayPrataprai Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:AABPM2791D 5-6 Nos.22& 23/Ahd/2022 2015-16 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. Smt.TruptiSanjay Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:AIVPM0988N 7.No.35/Ahd/20222019-20 Smt.TruptiSanjay Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:AIVPM0988N D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 2 8.Nos.56/Ahd/20222019-20 D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. Smt.TruptiSanjay Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:AIVPM0988N 9.No.37/Ahd/20222019-20 Smt.VishwaSanjay Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:CPEPM3820B D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. 10.No.57/Ahd/20222019-20 D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. VishwaSanjay Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:CPEPM3820B 11- 12 Nos.21& 58/Ahd/2022 2014-15 & 2019-20 D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. ShriGauravSanjay Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:AYMPM9494N 13No.36/Ahd/20222019-20 ShriGauravSanjay Mehta, 1563/A,Aashirwad Rupani, SardarnagarRoad, Bhavnagar-364001. PAN:AYMPM9494N D.C.I.T., CentralCircle-1(1), Ahmedabad. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 3 Assesseeby:ShriTusharHemani,Sr.Advocate withShriParimalsinhB.Parmar Revenueby:ShriSudhenduDas,Sr.DR सुनवाईकीतारीख /DateofHearing:14/02/2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /DateofPronouncement:20/03/2024 आदेश /ORDER PERBENCH: ThecaptionedcrossappealshavebeenfiledattheinstanceoftheAssessee andtheRevenueagainstthecommonorderoftheLearnedCommissionerof IncomeTax(Appeals)-11,Ahmedabad,dated28/10/2022arisinginthematterof assessmentorderpassedunders.153AoftheIncomeTaxAct,1961(here-in- afterreferredtoas"theAct")relevanttotheAssessmentYearasmentionedin thecausetitle. 2.First,wetakeupAssessee’sappealbearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022 fortheAY2019-20forthepurposeofadjudication. 3.Attheoutset,itwassubmittedbytheLd.Counselfortheassesseethathe hasbeeninstructednottopressgroundnumbers2and3oftheappeal.Hence, thesameareherebydismissedasnotpressed. 4.TheonlyissueraisedbytheassesseeisthattheLd.CIT(A)erredin confirmingtheadditioninpartamountingtoRs.26,81,727/-onaccountofcash receiptfromKothiSteelgroup. 5.Thenecessaryfactsarethattheassesseeinthepresentcaseisan individualandwassubjecttosearchalongwithotherfamilymembersandclose concernsu/s132(2)oftheActdated19/11/2019.Theassesseealongwithhis familymemberswasownerof3partnershipfirmsandoneprivatelimited IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 4 company,amongotherbusinessentities,namelyGangaIndustries,Jamuna Industries,SaraswatiEnterprisesandNarmadaConcastPvt.Ltd.Thesebusiness entitieswereownedbytheassesseealongwithfamilymembers.Assuch,allthe familymembersoftheassesseewereholdingsharesinthepartnershipfirmas wellasintheprivatelimitedcompanymentionedabove. 5.1Asaresultofsearch,anagreementcumMOUdated26/06/2018was recoveredfromthepremisesoftheassessee.AspertheMOU,theimpugned3 partnershipfirmsandoneprivatelimitedcompanyweretransferredtoShri FirdausbhaiKothiandothersofKothiSteelgroup.Allthe3partnershipfirmsand privatelimitedcompanywerelocatedatoneplacebearingsurveynumber 159/160,PlotNo.6/7,villageMalparnearMamsa,GhoghaDistrict,Bhavnagar. ThepartybeingKothiGroupagainsttheacquisitionofpartnershipfirmandprivate limitedcompanywasrequiredtopaygrossconsiderationofRs.40,00,00,000/- whichwasreducedbytheamountofloanliabilitytakenoverbytheKothiGroup amountingtoRs.23,59,09,226/-only.Thus,thenetconsiderationtobe dischargedbytheKothiSteelGroupwasworkedoutatRs.18,59,54,766/-which wastobepaidinthemannerdetailedbelow: 1.PaymenttobemadeonexecutionofMOURs.1,09,54,766/- 2.PaymenttobemadeinmonthlyinstalmentsRs.17,00,00,000/- 3.SubsidyreceivablebyNCPLtobereimbursedby KothitoSanjayMehtaonreceiptfromGovt Rs.50,00,000/- TotalRs.18,59,54,766/- 5.2However,itwasthecontentionoftheassesseethathehasnotreceived anyamountfromKothiSteelagainstthetransferofthebusinessentities discussedabove.Aspertheassesee,thecapitalofthepartnersinthepartnership firmwasnegativeandthereforetherewasnoquestionofmakinganypaymentto theassesseebyKothiGroupagainstacquisitionofthepartnershipfirm. Furthermore,itwasalsopointedoutbytheassesseethatthefirmhasnotbeen dissolvedandthereforetheprovisionsofsection45(4)oftheActcannotbe appliedforcalculatingthegaininthehandsoftheassessee. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 5 5.3Regardingthetransferofsharesoftheprivatelimitedcompanynamely NCPL,theassesseesubmittedthattheyacquiredsharesofthecompanyinthe FinancialYear2016-17atRs.1pershareonlyandtransferredthesharesatthe samevaluetoKothifamilydated10/09/2018.Furthermore,theassesseealso submittedthattherewasnegativenetworthoftheprivatelimitedcompanyand thereforetherewasnooption/possibilityformakingpaymentoverandabove valueofthesharesbyKothiGroup. 5.4However,theAOdisagreedwiththecontentionoftheassesseeandmade anadditionofRs.4,55,21727/-tothetotalincomeoftheassesseebyobserving asunder: Aftercarefulconsiderationofreplyoftheassesseeandmaterialsavailableonrecorditis foundthatargumentoftheassesseeisnottenableandthereforetotaladditionof Rs.18,59,54,766/-isrequiredtobemade.Itispertinenttonotethatthesaidamountis attributabletothetransactionofSanjyMehtaGroupwithNCPL.Therefore,thesaid additionofRs.18,59,54,766/-requiredtobedistributedamongtheshareholdersofSanjay MehtaGroupintheirShareholdingratioinNCOL.Theshareholdingratioisasunder: Sr.No.NamePercentage 1.SanjayMehta24.48% 2.TruptiMehta30.01% 3.GauravMehta30.34% 4.VishwaMehta15.17% Total100% 5.1InviewoftheabovetheadditionofRs.18,59,54,766/-isdividedasunder: Sr.NoNamePercentageAmount 1.SanjayMehta24.48%4,55,21,727 2.TruptiMehta30.01%5,58,05,025 3.GauravMehta30.34%5,64,18,676 4.VishwaMehta15.17%2,82,09,338 Total18,59,54,766 ConsideringtheaboveworkingtheadditionofRs.4,55,21,727/-ismadeinthehandsof theassessee. Therefore,anadditionofRs.4,55,21,727/-isbeingmadeinthehandsofthe assesseefortransferofownershipintheabovementionedfirms/companiesasCapital gains. 6.AggrievedassesseepreferredanappealtotheLd.CIT(A).Theassessee beforetheLd.CIT(A),contendedthattherewasaliabilityinthebooksof IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 6 accountsofNCPLforRs.17.00crorespayabletoM/sPriyaBlueIndustriesLtd. Therefore,nothingwasreceivabletotheassesseefromthetransferofthe entities/companytoKothifamily.Aspertheassessee,hehasnotreceivedany moneyfromthetransferofthebusinessentitiesdiscussedabove.Likewise,there wasnodocumentorevidencefoundduringsearchoperationsuggestingthatthe assesseehasreceivedanymoneyfromthetransferofthebusinessentities discussedabove.Similarly,theAOhasnotbroughtanythingonrecordinsupport ofhisclaimbyreferringanystatementofthefamilymembersofKothifamilythat therewasanypaymentincashtotheassesseeoutoftheallegedsumofRs. 18.59crores. 6.1Theassesseefurthercontendedthattherewasnegativebalanceof partnersinthepartnershipfirmaswellasthereisnegativenet-worthofthe company.Thus,therewasnooption/possibilityformakinganypaymentincash totheassesseebytheKothifamily. 6.2TheassesseealsocontendedthatthesumofRs.17.00croreswere payablebytheKothifamilytothePriyaBlueIndustriesLtd.whichisevidentfrom theMOU.Thus,theassesseecontendedthatthedocumentunearthedduringthe searchshouldbereadintotalityandtherefore,noadverseinterferencecanbe drawnagainsttheassesee.Assuch,NCPLisundertheobligationtorepaythe loantoPriyaBlueIndustriesLtd.whichisevidentfromtheMOU.Likewise,there wasnorealizationofanymoneyofRs.50lacsrepresentingthesubsidy.Therefore, theallegationoftheAOthattheassesseefamilyhadreceivedpaymentincashof Rs.18.59croresismisplaced.Accordingly,theassesseeprayedthatthe proportionateadditionmadeforRs.4,55,21,727/-deservetobedeleted. 7.TheLd.CIT(A),afterconsideringthesubmissionoftheassesseeobserved thatthecapitalbalanceoftheowner/partnersinthepartnershipfirmbeing erstwhileSanjayfamilymembersisnegative.Likewise,theLd.CIT(A),also observedthattheintrinsicvalueoftheshareunderRule11UAoftheIncomeTax IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 7 RulesofthecompanybeingNCPLwasnegativeasondateoftransferofthe businessentitiestoM/s.Kothifamily.Accordingly,theld.CIT-Awasoftheview thattherewasnopossibilityofhavingreceivedanyconsiderationfromKothi Groupagainstthetransferofthebusinessentities.Nevertheless,theLd.CIT(A), foundthatthebusinessentitieshavebeentransferredtotheKothifamilyin pursuancetotheMOUdated28/06/2018,whichimpliesthattheMOUhasacted bytherespectiveparties.AspertheMOUthepaymentofRs.1,09,54,766/-wasto bepaidatthetimeofsigningtheMOUandthusthisimpliesthatsuchpayment musthavebeenpaidbytheKothifamily/Group.Likewise,theLd.CIT(A),also foundthatKothifamilywasalsosubjecttosearchu/s132(2)oftheAct,dated 05/11/2020whereinanadditionofRs.1,09,54,766/-wasaddedinthehandsof theKothifamilymembers.Thus,theLd.CIT(A),concludedthattheadditionof Rs.1,09,54,766/-wastobemadeinthehandsofthefamilymembersofthe asseseewhichwasdoneinthemannerasdetailedbelow. Sr. No. NamePercentageAmount(Rs.) 1.SanjayMehta24.48%26,81,727 2.TruptiMehta30.01%32,87,525 3.GauravMehta30.34%33,23,676 4VishwaMehta15.17%16,61,838 Total1,09,54,766 7.1RegardingpaymentofRs.17crorestheLd.CIT(A),observedthatthere wasliabilityinthebooksofNPCLwhichwastobepaidtoPriyaBlueIndustriesLtd. ThisfactwasalsoverymuchreflectedintheMOUdated26/06/2018.Thus,theLd. CIT(A),wasoftheviewthattheseizeddocumentshouldbereadaswholeand notinbidofpiecessoastobenefittorevenue.Aspertheseizeddocument,there wasanamountreceivablebyPriyaBlueIndustriesfromtheNCPLwhichwasvery muchreflectinginthebooksofrespectiveparties.Thisfactwasalsoaccepted duringthecourseofsearchproceedingsinthecaseofKothifamily/Group. Accordingly,theLd.CIT-Awasoftheviewthatsuchadditionisnotwarranted. TheLd.CIT(A)alsoreferredtheledgercopyoftheloantransactionasdiscussed IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 8 above.TheentrieswerereflectedinthebooksbyPriyaBlueIndustriesLtd.and KothiFamilies. 7.2RegardingthereceiptofRs.50lacsonaccountofsubsidyreceivabletheLd. CIT(A)wasoftheviewthataspertheMOUthisamountwastobepaidbyKothi familytotheassesseeonrealizationfromtheGovernment.ButtheAOhasnot broughtanythingonrecordsuggestingwhethertheamountofsubsidyhasbeen realizedbytheKothiFamily/Group.Accordingly,theLd.CIT(A),wasoftheview thatnoadditionofRs.50lacscanbemadeinthehandsoftheassesseeandhis familymembers. 7.3Inviewoftheabove,theLd.CIT(A),waspleasedtoconfirmtheaddition madebytheAOinpartbyobservingasunder: 6.11Consideringthefactsdiscussedhereinabove,additionofRs.4,55,21,727/-made bycomputingcapitalgainonaccountoftransferofbusinessofpartnershipfirmandshares ofNCPLinthehandsoftheappellantisrestrictedtoRs.26,81,727/-Thebalanceaddition madebyAOisdeleted.Thus,thegroundsofappealno2&3arepartlyallowed. 8.BeingaggrievedbytheorderoftheLd.CIT-A,boththeassesseeandthe revenueareinappealbeforeus.Theassesseeisinappealagainsttheaddition confirmedbytheLd.CIT(A)foranamountofRs.26,81,727/-onlywhereasthe RevenueisinappealagainstthedeletionofadditionmadebytheAOamounting toRs.4,28,40,000/-only.Therelevantgroundofappealofrevenue’sappealin IT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20isreproducedasunder: 1.Inthefactsandonthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,Ld.CIT(A)erredin deletingtheadditionofRs.4,28,40,000/-madeonaccountofundisclosedcapitalgain raisedduetotransferofownershipofvariousfirms/companies,despitethefactthatatthe timeofexecutionofAgreement-Cum-MOUdated26.06.2018,Mr.FirdousbhaiKothiwas liabletopayofRs.18,59,54,766/-toMr.SanjayMehtaandotherfamilymembersforsale considerationagainstassetsandallliabilitiesofNCPLand4concernsandhasmadecash paymentofRs.1,09,54,766/-toMr.SanjayMehtaandhisotherfamilymemberswhichwas consideredunexplainedpaymentinthehandsofKothiSteelGroupforyear.Moreover,the assesseehasnotgivenanyproofthatthesaidagreementcumMoUwasconcealed. 9.TheLd.ARbeforeusfiledapaperbookrunningfrompages1to182and contendedthattheassesseehasnotreceivedanyamountfromtheKothifamily/ IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 9 groupagainstthetransferofpartnershipfirmsandprivatelimitedcompany.As pertheLd.ARthenetworthofthepartnershipfirmsaswellasofprivatelimited companywasnegativeandthereforenoamountwasreceivedbytheassessee againstthetransferofpartnershipfirmandprivatelimitedcompany. 9.1TheLd.ARalsocontendedthattheamountofRs.17croreswere representingtheliabilityinthebooksofNCPLpayabletotheM/sPriyaBlue IndustriesLimitedwhichwasalsoacceptedwhileframingtheassessmentinthe handoftheNCPL.Likewise,theLd.ARcontendedthattheassesseehasnot receivedanyamountonaccountofsubsidyandthereforethequestionofmaking anyadditioninthehandsoftheassesseedoesnotarises. 9.2Therewasasearchatthepremisesoftheassesseewhereinnodocument ofincriminatingnaturewasfoundsuggestinghavingbeenreceivedany unaccountedmoneyincashfromKothiFamily. 10.Ontheotherhand,theld.DRcontendedthattheassesseehastransferred lotofassetsincludinglandalongwiththeliabilityagainstthenetconsiderationof Rs.18.59croresandthereforethesameisliabletobeaddedinthehandsofthe familyofShriSanjayMehta.BoththeLd.ARandtheLd.DRbeforeusvehemently supportedtheorderoftheauthoritiesbelowtotheextentfavourabletothem. 11.Wehaveheardtherivalcontentionsofboththepartiesandperusedthe materialsavailableonrecord.Theissuebeforeusrevolvesaroundthetransferof businessentitiesdiscussedabovebytheassesseeinpursuancetotheagreement cumMOUdated26/06/2018.Fromtheprecedingdiscussion,wenotecertainfacts aselaboratedbelow: i.Threepartnershipfirmsandoneprivatelimitedcompanywas transferredtoKothifamilyinpursuancetotheagreementcumMOUdated 26/06/2018. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 10 ii.Thus,itcanbeconcludedthattheMOUbetweenasseseeandKothi familyhasbeenacteduponandthereforesuchdocumentrepresentsthe incriminatingmaterials. iii.Nextcontroversywhethersuchtransferofbusinessactivitieshas generatedincomeinthehandsoftheassessee.Inthisregard,wereferthe break-upofRs.18.59croresallegedlyreceivedbytheassesseeasdetailed below: OnceithasbeenheldthattheMOUhasactedupon,wecaninferthat assesseehasreceivedasumofRs.1,09,54,766/-alongwithfamily membersatthetimeofexecutionoftheMOUwhichhasnotbeendisclosed bythefamilymembersoftheassesseeintheirrespectivereturns. v.Likewise,itisalsopertinenttonotethatthesameamountofRs. 1,09,54,766/-hasalsobeenaddedinthehandsoftheKothifamily. Accordingly,wedonotfindanyinfirmityintheorderofLd.CIT(A),sofar astheadditionofRs.1,09,54,766/-concerninthehandsofthefamily membersoftheMehtafamily. vi.RegardingthesumofRs.17,00,00,000/-,wenotethatthisamount waspayablebyNCPLtoM/sPriyaBlueIndustriesLimitedandthereforethe samecannotbeconsideredaspartofconsiderationasallegedbytheAO. ThisfactwasalsoacceptedbytheAOintheassessmentframedu/s153A oftheAct,inthehandsofKothiFamily.Furthermore,thelandtransactions 1.Paymenttobemadeonexecutionof MOU Rs.1,09,54,766/- 2.Paymenttobemadeinmonthly instalments Rs.17,00,00,000/- 3.SubsidyreceivablebyNCPLtobe reimbursedbyKothitoSanjayMehtaon receiptfromGovt Rs.50,00,000/- TotalRs.18,59,54,766/- IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 11 weredulydocumentedandrecordedintherespectivebooksofaccountsof PriyaBlueIndustriesLtd.AndNCPL.Likewise,suchamountofloanswas stillexistinginthebooksofaccountsofrespectivepartieswiththeminor changeonaccountofpaymentmadetoM/sPriyaBlueIndustriesLtd. Accordingly,weupholdtheorderoftheLd.CIT(A). vii.RegardingtheamountofRs.50lacs,wenotethatsuchamountwas tobereceivedupontherealizationofsubsidy.However,Ld.CIT(A)has givenclearcutfindingsthatsuchamounthasnotbeenreceivedand findingsoftheLd.CIT(A),hasalsonotbeencontrovertedbytheLd.DR appearingonbehalfoftherevenue. 11.1Thus,weareoftheviewthatsuchadditionofRs.50lacsonaccount subsidyisnotrequiredtobemadeinthehandsoftheassesseeandhisfamily members.Thus,weupholdthefindingsoftheLd.CIT(A).Inviewoftheabove facts,wedonotfindanyreasontointerfereintheorderoftheLd.CIT(A), accordinglythegroundsofappealoftheassesseeandtherevenuearehereby dismissed. 12.ThenextissueraisedbytheassesseeisthattheLd.CIT(A)oughttohave allowedapplicationofallegedunaccountedreceiptagainsttheunexplained jewelleryaddedinthehandsoftheassesseeintheassessmentyear2020-21.At thetimeofhearingtheLd.ARmadeapleathatiftheadditionofRs.26,81,727/- issustainedinthehandsoftheassesseethenthesameshouldbeconsideredas applicationofunaccountedjewelleryintheassessmentyear2020-21.Wefind forceintheargumentoftheLd.ARfortheassesseeandtherefore,weholdthat theassesseeisentitledforthetelescopingbenefitintheAY2020-21.Accordingly, thegroundofappealraisedbytheassesseeisallowed. 12.1Intheresult,theappealfiledbytheassesseeispartlyallowed. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 12 ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022bytheRevenueincaseofthe assesseeShriSanjayPMehtafortheAY2019-20 13.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytherevenueincaptioned appealhasbeenadjudicatedalongwithassessee’sgroundsofappealraisedin IT(SS)No.34/Ahd/2022fortheAY2019-20.Theissueraisedbytheassesseein thesaidappealalonghasbeendecidedwithrevenue’sgroundofappealvide paragraphNo.11ofthisorderwhereinrevenue’sgroundofappealhasbeen dismissed.Forthedetaileddiscussion,pleaserefertotheabove-mentioned paragraph.HencethegroundsofappealraisedbytheRevenuearehereby dismissed. 13.1Intheresult,appealoftherevenueisherebydismissed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.30/Ahd/2022,bytheassesseeShriSanjayP MehtafortheAY2020-21 14.Theassesseehasraisedfollowinggroundsofappeal: 1.Inlawandinthefactsandcircumstancesoftheappellant'scase,theLd.CIT(A)has erredinnotentertainingthegroundsofappealchallengingthevalidityofassessment order. 2.Inlawandinthefactsandcircumstancesofthecase,theLd.CIT(A)hasfailedto appreciatethattheappellantwasnotprovidedanyopportunityofbeingheardasrequired u/s.127(1)andu/s.127(2)beforetransferofappellant'scasefromAssessingOfficer, BhavnagartoAssessingOfficeratCentralCircle,Ahmedabad.Further,anyorderu/s.127 inthematterisnotreceived.Accordingly,thetransferofcasewasnotvalid.Consequent assessmentorderwasalsonotvalid. 3.TheLd.CIT(A)haserredinconfirmingtheadditiononaccountofallegedunexplained GoldJewellerytotheextentofRs.2,24,13,080/-,outoftheadditionmadeinthe assessmentorderatRs.4,69,68,375/-. 4Inlawandinthefactsandcircumstancesofthecase,theLd.CIT(A)oughttohave deletedtheadditionmadeinrespectofGoldJewelleryholdbyMr.GauravMehta,Mrs. RiddhiMehta,Mr.VishwaMehtaandHUFofMr.SanjayMehtaandsuchadditiondeserves tobedeleted. 5.Inlawandinthefactsandcircumstancesofthecase,TheLd.CIT(A)oughttohave appreciatedthattheGoldJewelleryheldbyMr.GauravMehta,Mrs.RiddhiMehta,Smt. TruptiMehta,Mr.VishwaMehtaandMr.SanjayMehtaHUFweresupportedbythe IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 13 valuationreportandentriesinthebooksofaccountoftherespectivepersonswhichwere muchpriortothedateofsearch.Hence,therewasnojustificationforholdingthatthe samewasunexplainedparticularlywhensuchvaluationreportsandentriesweremade availabletotheAuthorizedOfficerofsearch. 6.Inlawandinthefactsandcircumstancesofthecase,thereisnoreasonformaking adjustmentinthevalueby20%todeterminetheamountconfirmedbytheCIT(A)and thereisnobasisfortheassumptionforincreaseinthevaluethemannerdeterminedby CIT(A). 7.Theappellantcravesleavetoadd,alter,amendand/orwithdrawanyofthegroundsor groundeitherbeforeoratthetimeofappealhearing. 14.1Attheoutset,itwassubmittedbytheLd.Counselfortheassesseethathe hasbeeninstructednottopressgroundnumbers2and3oftheappeal.Hence, thesameareherebydismissedasnotpressed. 15.TheonlyeffectiveissueraisedbytheassesseeisthatthelearnedCIT(A) erredinsustainingtheadditionofRs.2,24,13,080/-undersection69oftheAct onaccountofunexplainedgoldanddiamondjewelry. 16.Thenecessaryfactsarethatduringthecourseofsearchproceeding, certaingoldanddiamondjewelrywerefoundandseizedfromtheresidenceofthe assesseeandfromthebanklockerheldinthenameofthefamilymemberofthe assesseewhicharedetailedasunder: Sr.No.FoundfromGoldand Diamond Jewellery Found(Net Wt.) Diamond Found(Ct) Goldand Diamond jewellery Seized(Net Wt.) Diamond Seized(Ct) 1.Residence2091.336152.02-- 2.Lockers8849.203398.767087.831312.67 Total10940.539550.787087.831312.67 16.1Theassesseeduringtheassessmentproceedingsexplainedtheownership ofjewelryinthehandsofhimself,HUFandfamilymemberswhichisdetailedas under: S.No.PersontowhomjewelrybelongGold(ingram)Daimond(inct) IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 14 1.SanjayPMehta(assessee)2601.45265.49 2.TruptiSanjayMehta(wife)3031.72159.28 3.SanjayPMehta-HUF943.371.28 4.GauravSMehta(Son)1546.9751.39 5.RidhiGMehta(Daughterinlaw)1448.155.52 6.VishwaSMehta(Daughter)1346.332.2 Total10950.84635.16 16.2Theassesseewithregardtosourceofjewelryinhishandandinthehands ofhiswifesubmittedthatheandhiswifeareholding1061.37&1853.3gramof goldjewelryand48.87&159.28Ctofdiamondrespectivelysinceyear1998.In supportofhisclaim,theassesseefurnishedavaluationreportdated09-04-1998 bythevaluerC.C.Shah.Theremainingjewelryinhisandhiswife’shandwere purchasedonorafter1 st April2014throughabankingchannel.Theassesseein supportfurnishedledgercopyalongcopyofinvoicesandrelevantextractofbank statement.Theassesseealsosubmittedthatheandhiswifehavealsodisclosed thevalueofjewelryintheassetsandliabilityscheduleofthereturnofincomefor theAY2018-19whichwasfiledbeforethedateofsearchoperation.Theassessee accordinglycontendedthatthegoldanddiamondbelongingtohim,andhiswife werefullyexplained. 16.3WithregardtothejewelrybelongingtoHUF,theassesseesubmittedthat suchgold&diamondjewelryweighing943.3gram&71.228Ctrespectively belongtoHUFsinceyear1994andinsupportfurnishedcopyofvaluationreport dated09-05-1994bythevaluerShriC.C.Shahandthesamewasfurtherrevalued ason01-04-2014and30-03-2019bytheGovernmentApprovedvaluerShriPradip CShah.TheHUFwasnotrequiredtomaintainbooksaspertheprovisionsof section44AAoftheAct.Therefore,forthelimitedpurpose,thebooks,without strictapplicationofGAAP,havebeenmaintainedsincetheimpugnedjewelry shownsuchlimitedpurposeinthebookssince01-04-2014.Therefore,jewelryto theextentbelongingtoHUFcannotbetreatedasunexplained. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 15 16.4Theassesseewithregardtothesourcesofjewelryinthehandofhisson ShriGauravSMehtaanddaughterVishwaSMehtasubmittedthattheygotgold& diamondjewelryfromgrandparents(assessee’sparent)namelyLateShriPartaprai MehtaandLateSmt.NeelaPMehta.InsupportofjewelryheldbyLateShri PartapraiMehtaandLateSmt.NeelaPMehta,theassesseefurnishesacopyof valuationreportdated18-04-1991and04-04-1999bythevaluerShriC.C.Shah. Likewise,hissonalsoreceivedgold&diamondjewelryweighing740.26gram& 37.75Ctrespectivelyasgiftfromfriendsandrelativeontheoccasionofhis marriagedated23-11-2017.Tosupporttheclaimofjewelryinthehandsofhis Son&Daughter,theassesseefurnishesacopyofvaluationreportfromthevaluer ShriAjitAmarchandJhaveridated7-12-2017and19-05-2016respectively.Inthe caseofsoni.e.ShriGuaravMehta,thevaluationreportclearlycontainsthedetails ofjewelryreceivedfromgrandparentsandontheoccasionofmarriage. 16.5Similarly,thedaughterin-lawSmt.RidhiGMehtagotentirejewelry belongingtoherontheoccasionofmarriageasgift. 16.6Theassesseealsocontendedthattheconsideringthebackgroundofhis familystatus,socialnorms,customwherefrequentfunctionsareheldonthe occasionsofdifferentfestivals,birthdaysandanniversary.Ontheoccasionof festivals,marriage,birthdayandanniversaryetc,friendsandrelativesgenerally givejewelryasagift.Therefore,beforemakinganyinference,thesefactsshall alsobeconsidered.TheCBDTvideinstructionNo.196dated11 th May1994also instructedthesearchauthoritynottoquestionthejewelryorornamentsof500 gramforeachmarriedwomeninfamily,250gramsforeachunmarriedwoman and100gramsforeachmalememberofthefamily.Consideringhisfamilynature andconsideringthesubstantialamountofgold/diamondleftoverbyhislate parents,hehimselfhasbeenmarriedformorethan30yearandduringthisperiod hiswifehasbeenreceivinggold&otherornamentondifferentoccasionfrom relativesaspartofcommunityculture.Therefore,consideringallthesefactorsthe quantitiesofgold/diamondsfoundarenotunreasonableorremainunexplained. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 16 16.7Theassesseealsosubmittedthatduringthesearchproceedinginhiscase, carriedon12-01-2010,thegoldornamentweighing766.78gramwasfoundand admittedasfromexplainedsources. 16.8However,theAOdisagreedwiththesubmissionoftheassesseeinpartand heldthattheassesseefailedtoexplainthesourcesofgold&diamondjewelry foundfromthebanklockerworthofRs.4,69,68,375/-only.Theassesseefamily alsodidnotfilewealthtaxreturnandfailedtoproduceplausibleevidenceto explainthesource.HencetheAOmadeadditionofRs.4,69,68,375/-under section69oftheAct. 17.TheaggrievedassesseepreferredanappealbeforethelearnedCIT(A)and reiteratedhiscontentionasmadeduringtheassessmentproceeding. 17.1ThelearnedCIT(A)afterconsideringthefactsintotalityacceptedthe explanationoftheassesseetotheextentofjewelryclaimedtobebelongingto theassesseeandhiswifewhereasdismissedtheexplanationoftheassesseewith regardtojewelryclaimedtobebelongingassessee’sson,daughterinlaw, daughterandHUF.Thegold/diamondclaimedtobelongingtotheassesseeand hiswifewereacceptedfromtheexplainedsourcesforthereasonthatbothhave shownsuchvaluablethinginthereturnofincomefiledforearlieryear.Theyalso furnishedsupportingdocumentssuchaspurchaseinvoices,paymentdetailsand valuationreportsofdifferentdates. 17.2ThelearnedCIT(A)furtherfoundthatassesseehasclaimedthathisson anddaughterreceivedgold&diamondfromhislateparentsasgift.However,no giftdeedwasfurnished.Theassesseeparentsdiedinearly2000butno explanationfurnishedwherethegold&diamondbelongingtothemwerekept beforegivingtohissonanddaughter.Thesourcesofacquisitionofsuchgoldby theassessee’sparentsarealsonotfurnished.Likewise,theassesseeclaimedthat IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 17 hissonanddaughterin-lawgotgold&diamondgiftsonoccasionofmarriage howevernodetailofpersonswhohavegivensuchgifthasbeenprovided.The son,daughteranddaughterin-lawhasnotbeenfilingwealthtaxreturnnor disclosedsuchjewelryintheITRsfiledbythem.Similarly,forgold/diamond claimedbelongingtoHUF,noevidenceestablishingtheacquisitionofsuch gold/diamondfromexplainedsourceshasbeenfurnished.TheHUFhasnot disclosedsuchgold/doingintheITRandnotfiledwealthtaxreturn.Merely,based onvaluationreport,thesourceofacquisitionofsuchgold/diamondinthehands ofHUF,assessee’sson,daughter,anddaughterinlawcannotbeaccepted. However,thelearnedCIT(A)asperCBDTinstructionprovidedtheadjustmentof goldof500graminthehandsofdaughterin-law,250gramsforunmarried daughterand100gramsforhisson. 17.3Thus,thelearnedCIT(A)partiallysustainedtheadditionofRs. 2,24,13,080/-only.TherelevantfindingofthelearnedCIT(A)isextractedasunder: 6.10Inviewofabovediscussion,itisheldthattheclaimmadebytheappellantregarding jewelleryheldbyhimandhiswifeisconsideredtobecorrect.However,theexplanation providedbytheappellantforjewelleryheldbyGauravMehta,RiddhiMehtaVishwaMehta andSanjayMehtaHUFisnotfoundtobecorrect.Themarketvalueofsuchjewelleryheld byabovereferredfourpersons31.03.2019isRs.2,13,93,317(Rs.62,04,393+Rs.56,30,969 +Rs52,18,232+Rs.43,39,723)andthesecannottobeexplainedjewellery.Itisobserved thatasperdecisionoftheHon'bleJurisdictionalHighCourtofGujaratinthecaseof RatanlalVyaparilalJain235CTR568andotherdecisionsrelieduponbyappellant,100 GmsofGoldjewellerytotheextentofmalemember,250Gmsforunmarrieddaughterand 500Gmsformarriedwomanisrequiredtobeconsideredasexplainedjewellery. ConsideringdetailedreasoninggivenbytheHon'bleJurisdictionalHighcourtreferred supra,theappellantisentitledtocreditof850Gmsofgoldjewellery(100GmsforGaurav Mehta,250GmsforVishwaMehtaand500GmsforRiddhiMehta). 6.11Itisobservedthatasthesearchwasconductedincaseoftheappellant'sGroupon 19.11.2019andapproximaterateofGoldwasRs.38,340/-per10Gms.,whereassimilar rateason31.03.2019wasRs.31,703.Theincreaseingoldrateonthedateofsearchis approximately20%andsimilarrateisalsoappliedtodiamondjewellery.Consideringthe holisticapproach,approximately20%markupismadetojewelleryvaluationason 31.03.2019,andquantumofunexplainedjewelleryworksouttoRs.2,56,71,980/- (2,13,93,317X120%)Astheappellantisentitledtocreditof850Gmsofgoldjewellery asexplainedjewelleryforreasonsstatedhereinabove,furthercreditofRs.32,58,900/- (850GmsX38,340per10Gmsrateonthedateofsearch).Thenetadditioninthehands ofappellantisconfirmedforRs.2,24,13,080/-. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 18 6.12Inviewofdetaileddiscussionmadehereinabove,additionmadebytheAOfor Rs.4,69,68,375/-isrestrictedtoRs.2,24,13,080.thebalanceadditionmadebytheAOis deleted.Thus,thegroundofappealno.3ispartlyallowed. 18.BeingaggrievedbytheorderofthelearnedCIT(A)boththeassesseeand therevenueareinappealbeforeus.Theassesseeisinappealagainstthe additionsustainedforRs.Rs.2,24,13,080/-whereastherevenueisinappeal againstthedeletionoftheadditionofRs.2,45,55,295.00only.Therelevant groundofappealoftherevenue’sappealinITSS(A)No.38/Ahd/2022readsas under: Onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecaseandinlaw,theLd.CIT(A)erredin deletingtheadditionofRs.2,45,55,295/-madeonaccountofunexplainedgold/jewellery u/s.69oftheITAct,withoutetcproducedbytheassesseetoexplainthesourceof investment. 19.ThelearnedARbeforeusfiledpaperbookrunningfrompages1to432 contendedthatthejewelleryindisputewasacquiredintheearlieryearand thereforethesamecannotbemadesubjecttotheadditionintheyearunder considerationundertheprovisionsofsection69oftheAct.Furthermore,the additionundersection69oftheActcanbemadeinrespectofthecostof investmentandnotthemarketvalue.Thus,theauthoritiesbelowhaveincorrectly adoptedthemarketvalueofthejewellerywhilecalculatingtheincomeunder section69oftheAct.Likewise,theld.CIT-Aalsoerredinapplying20%markup whiledeterminingthevalueofthejewellerywhichisnottenableintheeyesof law. 19.1ThelearnedARalsofiledthenecessarydetailsintheformofannexureA justifyingthesourceofinvestmentmadeinthejewellerybasedontheincome declaredintheearlieryearsbytheassesseeandhisfamilymembers.Thelearned ARalsosubmittedthattherewasvaluationreportwithrespecttothejewellery pertainingtotheearlieryearsandthereforethesamecannotbemadesubjectto theadditionintheyearunderconsideration. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 19 20.Ontheotherhand,thelearnedDRbeforeusreiteratedthefindings containedintherespectiveordersoftheauthoritiesbelowasfavourabletohim. BoththelandedARandtheDRbeforeusvehementlysupportedtheorderofthe authoritiesbelowtotheextentfavourabletothem. 21.Wehaveheardtherivalcontentionsofboththepartiesandperusedthe materialsavailableonrecord.Thefactsofthedisputeinvolvedintheappeal beforeushavealreadybeenexplained/detailedintheprecedingparagraphwhich areunambiguous.Accordingly,forthesakeofbrevityandconvenience,weare notinclinedtorepeatthesame. 21.1Fromtheprecedingdiscussion,wenotethatassesseehasbeenableto satisfactorilyexplainthegenuinenessofgold/diamondbelongingtohimandhis wife.Boththeassesseeandhiswifewereabletoproduceevidenceofpurchaseof jewellerymadeafterApril2014andtheearlyacquiredbefore1998byfurnishing valuationreport.Theassesseeandhiswifehavealsodisclosedthevalueof jewelleryintheirrespectivereturnsofincomefiledundertheAct.Hencetothis extent,wedonotfindanyinfirmityinthefindingofthelearnedCIT(A).Thus,out oftotal(10940.539gram&550.78Ct)gold&diamondweighing5633.17gram& 424.77Ctrespectivelybelongingtotheassesseeandhiswifeheldasfrom explainedsources. 21.2Nowcomingtoremaininggold&diamondweighing5307.369gram& 126.01CtaggregatevaluingatRs.2,56,71,980aspertheld.CIT-Awhichwas claimedasbelongingtoassessee’sson,daughterin-law,daughter,andHUF. Beforegoingintothegenuinenessofgoldbelongingtofamilymembersofthe assessee,thecontroversyariseswhetherthebenefitoftheinstructionissuedby theCBDTdated11 th May1994,grantingbenefitofthejewelryheldbythefamily membersshouldbegivenonlytothefamilymembersaswellwhohavealready disclosedjewelryintheirrespectivehands.Thisquestionhasbeenansweredby IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 20 theJaipurTribunalinthecaseofRamPrakashMahawarvs.DCITreportedin115 taxmann.com241.Therelevantextractoftheorderisreproducedasunder: 2.6Wehaveconsideredtherivalsubmissionsaswellastherelevantmaterialsavailable onrecord.Thefirstissueisregardingtheadditionsustainedbytheld.CIT(A)tothetune ofRs.4,57,404/-onaccountofunexplainedgoldjewellerybyrejectingtheclaimofthe assesseebeingacquisitionofthesaidjewellerybywayofpurchasesmadefromtimeto timeandalsorecordedinthebooksofaccountoftheassessee.Thereisnodispute regardingthefactthatjewellerytotheextent343.328gms.representsthepurchases madebytheassesseefromtimetotimewhichisdulysupportedbythepurchasebills foundduringthesearchandseizureaction.Thesaidquantityofjewelleryisdulyrecorded inthebalancesheet/booksofaccountoftheassesseeandhisfamilymembers.Oncethe AOhasnotdisputedthepurchasesmadebytheassesseeofthesaidquantityofjewellery thenthesamecannotbetreatedasunexplainedjewelleryoftheassessee.TheAOhas deniedthebenefitofthesaidquantityofjewelleryonthegroundthatsincethebenefitof reasonablejewellerytotheextentof850gms.asperCBDTInstructionNo.1916dated 11-05-1994isalreadygranted,therefore,tothatextent,nofurtherbenefitcanbegranted. ItispertinenttonotethatCBDTInstructionNo.1916dated11-05-1994hasexplainedin caseofgoldjewelleryfoundinthepossessionoftheassesseeduringthecourseofsearch andseizureactionandtheassesseeisnotabletoexplainthesamethenthequantity prescribedunderthesaidCBDTInstructionNo.1916inrespectofmarriedfemalemember, unmarriedfemalememberandmalememberoftheassesseewouldbetreatedasa reasonableholdingofjewelleryonaccountofacquisitionofthatmuchjewelleryonvarious occasionsofmarriages,othersocial&customaryoccasionsasprevailinginthesociety. Therefore,areasonablepossessionofthejewelleryasperthecustomsprevailinginthe societyisthebasisforallowingthebenefitofcertainquantityofjewelleryexplainedbythe CBDTInstructionNo.1916dated11-05-1994whichmeansthattheassesseeneednotto explainthesourceofjewelleryfoundinhispossessiontotheextentofspecifiedquantity treatedasreasonablepossessionbyfamilymembersoftheassessee.ThesaidCBDT InstructionNo.1916allowingthespecificquantityasreasonableandneednottobe explained,doesnotincludethejewellerywhichisotherwiseexplainedbyproofof documentsofacquisitionaswellasdeclared/recordedinthebooksofaccountofthe assessee.Hence,thequantityofjewellerywhichisotherwiseexplainedbytheassesseeby producingthepurchasebillsaswellasrecordedinthebooksofaccountoftheassessee andtheAOhadnotdisputedthesaidexplanationthenthequantitywhichisexplained otherwisebyproducingthepurchasebillsandbooksofaccountwouldnotbetreatedas partofthequantityofreasonablepossessionasprescribedunderthesaidCBDT InstructionNo.1916dated11-05-1994.Therefore,thebenefitofCBDTInstructionNo. 1916dated11-05-1994willnottakeawaythebenefitoftheexplainedjewelleryacquired bytheassessee.Accordingly,inthefactsandcircumstanceofthecase,thequantityof jewellerytotheextentof343.328gms.hastobeallowedseparatelyasexplained jewelleryandnoadditioncanbemadetothatextent. 21.3InthelightoftheaboveorderoftheTribunal,weholdthattheassesseeis entitledforthefurtherbenefitofthejewelriesforhimself,hiswife,andother membersaswell.Accordingly,theassesseeisentitledforthereliefof1450grams ofgoldvaluingRs.55,59,300.Only.Nowthedisputeremainsforthebalance quantityofgoldi.e.(10940.539minus[2601.45plus3031.72=5633.17grams] IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 21 5633.17=3857.369gramsvaluingatRs.and(550.78minus[265.49plus 159.28=424.77]diamond126.01Ct.aggregatevaluingatRs.2,01,22,680.00only. 21.4Movingfurther,wenotethatintheimmediatepreviousassessmentyear, theassesseefamilywassubjecttoanadditionofRs.1,09,54,766onaccountof unaccountedreceipt.Iftheremaininggold&diamondheldtoasacquiredfrom undisclosedincome,thenthecreditofsuchunaccountedincomeshouldalsobe providedassumingthatsuchunaccountedincomehasbeenutilizedforacquiring gold&diamond.Thus,thedisputedadditionremainsatRs.91,67,914.00.only. 21.5Withregardtoremainingamountsofjewelry,wenotethattheentirefamily membersoftheassesseehavebeenpayinghugeamountoftaxesontheincome disclosedbythemindifferentassessmentyears.Theincomedisclosedbythe familymembersoftheassesseeindifferentassessmentyearsasperdetailed availableonrecordhavebeensummarizedasunder: Nameoffamily member 2014-15(Amt inRs.) 2017-18(Amt. inRs.) 2019-20(Amt. inRs.) 2020-21(Amt. inRs.) SanjayPMehtaNotavailableNotavailable2,44,45,200/-2,71,70,460/- TruptiSMehta7,03,39,880/-1,23,29,190/-1,11,84,570/-Notavailable GauravSMehta5,01,83,310/-Notavailable1,06,15,510/-Notavailable VishwaSMehtaNotavailableNotavailableNILNotavailable Total12,05,23,190/-1,23,29,190/-4,62,45,280/-2,71,70,460/- Note*:IncomeforA.Y.2014-15intheabovetableincludesexemptedLTCG. 21.6Aspertheabovetable,theassesseeandhisfamilymembershave disclosedincomeofmorethan20croresovertheperiodoftime.Thus, consideringtheamountofincomedeclaredbytheassessee,hisfamily,theirsocial status,customandculturewherepeoplebuyorgiftjewelleryonoccasionof festivalsuchasDiwali,marriage,birthdayandanniversaryweareinclinedtohold thattherewasnogoldavailablewiththeassesseewhichcanbetermedas unexplained.Accordingly,inourconsideredviewnoadditioniswarrantedinthe IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 22 givenfactsandcircumstances.Hence,thegroundofappealoftheassesseeis allowedandthegroundofappealoftherevenueisherebydismissed. 22.Intheresultappealoftheassesseeisherebypartlyallowed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.38/Ahd/2022bytheRevenueincaseofthe assesseeSanjayPMehtafortheA.Y.2020-21 23.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytherevenueincaptioned appealhasbeenadjudicatedalongwithassessee’sgroundsofappealraisedin IT(SS)No.30/Ahd/2022fortheA.Y.2020-21.Theissueraisedbytheassesseein thesaidappealalongwithrevenuegroundofappealhasbeendecidedvide paragraphno.21ofthisorderwhereinrevenuegroundofappealhasbeen dismissed.Fordetaileddiscussion,pleaserefertotheabovementionedparagraph. Hence,thegroundsofappealraisedbytheRevenueareherebydismissed. 24.Intheresult,theappealoftherevenueisherebydismissed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.22/Ahd/2022bytheRevenueincaseofassessee “TruptiSanjayMehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2014-15 25.TheRevenuehasraisedfollowinggroundsofappeal: 1.Whetheronthefactsandincircumstancesofthecaseandlaw,theLd.CIT(A)erredin givingrelieftotheassesseeholdingthatnoincriminatingmaterialswerefoundwithregard totheissueonwhichadditionsweremadeintheassessmentorder,despitethefactthat anSLPonthisissueispendingbeforetheHon'bleSupremeCourtofIndia. 2.WhethertheLd.CIT()Ahaserredinlawandfactsindeletingtheadditionof Rs.5,97,26,725/-withoutappreciatingthefactthatasperallotmentletterdated 15.03.2011ofParasnathTextilesLtd.(ComfortFintechLtd.)itwasestablishedthatthe assesseehadtradedandgainedLongTermCapitalGaininthisscrip,whichisapenny stock. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 23 26.TheinterconnectedissueraisedbytheRevenueisthatthelearnedCIT(A) erredindeletingtheadditionofRs.5,97,26,725/-onaccountofdisallowanceof boguslongtermcapitalgain. 27.Thefactsinbriefarethattheassessee,anindividual,isderivingincome fromsalaryandinterest.Theassesseefortheyearunderconsiderationdeclared taxableincomeofRs.1,06,13,155/-onlyinreturnofincomefiledundersection 139oftheActdated30 th July2014.Besides,theassesseealsoclaimedtohave earnedexemptedlongtermcapitalgainofRs.5,97,26,725/-onthesaleof 200000sharesofM/sComfortFincapLtd(previouslyknownasParasnathTextile Ltd).Thereturnfiledundersection139oftheActwasprocessedundersection 143(1)oftheActwithoutanyadjustment. 27.1Subsequentlytheassesseewassubjecttosearchproceedingundersection 132oftheActdated18 th November2019andconsequentlytheassessment/ reassessmentproceedingundersection153AoftheActinitiatedfortheyear underconsiderationwasinitiated.Duringtheproceedingsundersection153Aof theAct,theAOfoundthatthesharesofM/sComfortFincapLtdwerepurchased bytheassesseeinaprivateplacementforRs.36lakhsonly.Thereafter,thescrip ofM/sComfortFincapLtdwaslistedonBSEandafterlistingpriceofthe impugnedshareincreasedmanifold.However,thecompanyM/sComfortFincap Ltddidnothavesubstantialbusinessprofitanddidnotannounceanyfuture projectwhichmayaffectsuchanabnormalriseinthepriceoftheshares.Further thepriceofthesharesharplydecreasedaftertheassesseeoffloadedtheshare. Accordingly,theAOheldthattheexemptedlong-termcapitalearnedbythe assesseeisnotgenuineandaddedsuchcapitalgainofRs.5,97,26,725/-tothe totalincomeoftheassessee. 28.TheaggrievedassesseepreferredanappealbeforethelearnedCIT(A).The assesseebeforethelearnedCIT(A)submittedthattheyearunderconsiderationis completed/unabatedassessmentforthepurposeoftheassessmentproceeding IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 24 undersection153AoftheAct.Therefore,anyaddition/assessmentofincomein theproceedingsundersection153AoftheActcanonlybemadebasedon incriminatingmaterial.Inotherwords,inthecaseofsearchassessment,no addition/assessmentofincomecanbemadeinabsenceofincriminatingmaterial unearthedduringthecourseofthesearchproceeding.Intheassessmentorder, theAOwhilemakingthedisallowanceofexemptedincomebeinglongtermcapital gainhasnowherereferredtoanyincriminatingmaterialfoundduringthecourse ofsearch.Assuch,nomaterialofanincriminatingnaturewasfoundinconnection withsaleandpurchaseofsharesofM/sComfortFincapLtd.Thus,theAOmade assessmentundersection153AoftheActbydisallowingtheexemptedgain withouthavingjurisdictiontodoso. 28.1Alternatively,theassesseealsochallengedadditionmadebytheAOon merit.Theshareswerepurchasedthroughbankingchannel,dulydematerialized, andsoldtheshareonthefloorofBSE.Theconsiderationwasreceivedthrough bankingchannelafterdeductionofSTT.Thesupportingdocumentsbeingshare certificate,demataccount,contractnote,bankstatementetcwerefurnishedto theAObuttheAOwithoutpointingoutanydefectorbringingmaterialonrecord suggestingthatcapitalgainearnedwasnotgenuinetreatedthesameasbogus. 29.ThelearnedCIT(A)afterconsideringthefactsintotalitydeletedthe additionmadebytheAOonthegroundthatnoincriminatingmaterialinrelation ofcapitalgainearnedbytheassesseewasfoundduringthecourseofthesearch proceeding.Therefore,theyearunderconsiderationbeingunabatedassessment, noadditioncanbesustained.ThelearnedCIT(A)inholdingsoreferredthe judgmentofHon’bleGujaratHighCourtincaseofCITvs.SaumyaConstruction reportedin387ITR529andHon’bleDelhiHighcourtincaseofCITvs.Kabul Chawlareportedin61taxmann.com412. 30.BeingaggrievedbythefindingofthelearnedCIT(A),therevenueisin appealbeforeus. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 25 31.ThelearnedDRbeforeusreiteratedthefindingscontainedinthe assessmentorderandfurthersubmittedthatthelong-termcapitalgainshownby theassesseerepresentsthebogusincomeandthereforethesameisliabletobe addedtothetotalincomeoftheassessee. 32.Ontheotherhand,thelearnedARbeforeusfiledapaperbookrunning from1to159andcontendedthattheyearindisputebeingunabatedassessment yearmeaningtherebyonlytheadditionbasedontheincriminatingdocumentcan bemade.Aspertheld.AR,therewasnotfoundduringthesearchanydocument ofincriminatingnatureandthereforethesameisliabletobedeleted.Theld.AR vehementlysupportedtheorderofthelearnedCIT-A. 33.Wehaveheardtherivalcontentionsofboththepartiesandperusedthe materialsavailableonrecord.Admittedly,theassesseewassubjecttosearch proceedingsundersection132oftheActandinconsequencetosearch proceedingsundersection153AoftheActinitiatedfortheassessmentor reassessmentofimmediate6assessmentyearswhichincludetheyearunder consideration.Inthecaseofsearch,theprovisionofsection153AoftheAct empowerstheAOtoassessorreassesstheincomeoftheassesseeforimmediate 6assessmentyearsprecedingtheyearinwhichsearchwasconductedandthe searchassessmentyear.Theassessmentforwhichregularassessmentunder section143(3)oftheActhavebeenmadeorthetimelimittoissuenoticeunder section143(2)oftheActhasbeenexpiredbeforethedateofsearch,the proceedingundersection132oftheActshallbetreatedasunabatedassessment forthepurposeofproceedingsundersection153AoftheAct.Theyearunder considerationinthepresentappealisundisputedlyanunabatedassessmentyear asthetimelimittoissuenoticeundersection143(2)oftheActhasalready expired.ItissettledpositionofthelawbyvariousHighCourtsincluding jurisdictionalHighcourtincaseofSaumyaConstruction(P.)Ltdreportedin387 ITR529andHon’bleDelhiHighcourtinthecaseofCITvs.KabulChawla(supra) IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 26 thatunabated/completedassessmentcannotbedisturbedinabsenceof incriminatingmaterialfoundfromthepremisesoftheassessee.Theviewtaken bytheHon’bleGujaratHighcourtincaseofSaumyaConstruction(P.)Ltd(supra) andHon’bleinthecaseofCITvs.KabulChawla(supra)hasbeenconfirmedby theHon’bleSupremeCourtinthecaseofPCIT,Central-3-Vs-AbhisarBuildwell Pvt.Ltd.reported[2023]149taxmann.com399(SC)whereinitwasheldas under: 12.IfthesubmissiononbehalfoftheRevenuethatincaseofsearchevenwhereno incriminatingmaterialisfoundduringthecourseofsearch,evenincaseof unabated/completedassessment,theAOcanassessorreassesstheincome/totalincome takingintoconsiderationtheothermaterialisaccepted,inthatcase,therewillbetwo assessmentorders,whichshallnotbepermissibleunderthelaw.Atthecostofrepetition, itisobservedthattheassessmentundersection153AoftheActislinkedwiththesearch andrequisitionundersections132and132AoftheAct.TheobjectofSection153Aisto bringundertaxtheundisclosedincomewhichisfoundduringthecourseofsearchor pursuanttosearchorrequisition.Therefore,onlyinacasewheretheundisclosedincome isfoundonthebasisofincriminatingmaterial,theAOwouldassumethejurisdictionto assessorreassessthetotalincomefortheentiresixyearsblockassessmentperiodeven incaseofcompleted/unabatedassessment.AsperthesecondprovisotoSection153A, onlypendingassessment/reassessmentshallstandabatedandtheAOwouldassumethe jurisdictionwithrespecttosuchabatedassessments.Itdoesnotprovidethatall completed/unabatedassessmentsshallabate.IfthesubmissiononbehalfoftheRevenue isaccepted,inthatcase,secondprovisotosection153Aandsub-section(2)ofSection 153Awouldberedundantand/orrewritingthesaidprovisions,whichisnotpermissible underthelaw. 13.Forthereasonsstatedhereinabove,weareincompleteagreementwiththeview takenbytheDelhiHighCourtinthecaseofKabulChawla(supra)andtheGujaratHigh CourtinthecaseofSaumyaConstruction(supra)andthedecisionsoftheotherHigh Courtstakingtheviewthatnoadditioncanbemadeinrespectofthecompleted assessmentsinabsenceofanyincriminatingmaterial. 33.1Inthecaseonhand,nomaterialwhatsoeverwasfoundorseizedfromthe premisesoftheassesseebasedonwhichanyincomecouldhavebeenassessed. WealsonotethattheAOintheassessmentorderalsodidnotrefertoany materialwhichwasfoundfromthepremisesoftheassessee.ThelearnedCIT(A) hasalsogivencategoricalfindingthatnoincriminatingmaterialinrelationto exemptedlongtermcapitalgainearnedbytheassesseewasunearthedduringthe searchproceedingwhichhasnotbeencontrovertedbythelearnedDRappearing beforeus.Accordingly,weholdthatthecompletedassessmentcannotbe disturbedundersection153AoftheActintheabsenceofincriminatingmaterial foundfromthepremisesoftheassessee. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 27 33.2OncetheadditionmadebytheAOisheldasnotsustainableintheeyes lawonthetechnicalground,theadjudicationoftheissuesraisedonmerit becomesredundantorinfructuous.Hence,wedonotdeemitnecessaryto adjudicatetheissueraisedonmerit. 33.3Inviewoftheabovedetaileddiscussion,wedonotfindanyinfirmityinthe findingofthelearnedCIT(A),thereforewedirecttheAOtodeletetheaddition madebyhim.Hencethegroundsofappealoftherevenueareherebydismissed. 34.Intheresultappealoftherevenueisherebydismissed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.23/Ahd/2022bytheRevenueincaseofassessee “TruptiSanjayMehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2017-18 35.Therevenuehasraisedfollowinggroundsofappeal: 1.Whetheronthefactsandincircumstancesofthecaseandlaw,theLd.CIT(A)erredin givingrelieftotheassesseeholdingthatnoincriminatingmaterialswerefoundwithregard totheissueonwhichadditionsweremadeintheassessmentorder,despitethefactthat anSLPonthisissueispendingbeforetheHon'bleSupremeCourtofIndia. 2.WhethertheLd.CIT()Ahaserredinlawandfactsindeletingtheadditionof Rs.3,22,40,880/-withoutappreciatingthefactthatthetransactionofshareswerenoticed duringthesearchactionandonthebasisofthematerialfoundduringthecoruseof search,theadditionwasmade.Itisalsopertinenttomentionthatduringthepostsearch proceedings,theassesseehadfiledthevaluationreportdated06.05.2016preparedby DCP&AssociatesandsignedbyShriVipulDhamsania. 36.TheinterconnectedissueraisedbytherevenueisthatthelearnedCIT(A) erredindeletingtheadditionofRs.3,22,40,880/-madeundersection56(2)(vii)(c) oftheAct. 37.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytherevenueinthecaptioned appealfortheAY2017-18isidenticaltotheissueraisedbytheRevenuein IT(SS)ANo.22/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2014-15.Therefore,the findingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.22/Ahd/2022shallalsobeapplicablefortheyear IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 28 underconsiderationi.e.assessmentyear2017-18.Theissueraisedbythe RevenueforAY2014-15hasbeendecidedbyusvideparagraphNo.33ofthis orderagainsttheRevenue.ThelearnedDRandtheARalsoagreedthatwhatever willbethefindingsfortheassessmentyear2014-15shallalsobeappliedforyear underconsiderationi.e.theassessmentyear2017-18.Hence,thegroundof appealfiledbytheRevenueisherebydismissed. 37.1IntheresultappealoftheRevenueisherebydismissed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.35/Ahd/2022bytheassessee“TruptiSanjay Mehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2019-20 38.TheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundNo.1&6ofthecaptioned appealfor2019-20isgeneralinnature,hencenotrequiredtobeadjudicated. Likewise,theissueraisedinground2and3ofthecaptionedappealinconnection withtransferofjurisdictionu/s127oftheActhasnotbeenpressedbythelearned ARoftheassessee.Hence,thesameisdismissedasnotpressed. 38.1Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundNo. 4ofappealisidenticaltotheissueraisedbytheassesseeinthecaseofShri SanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019- 20.Therefore,thefindingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shallalsobe applicabletotheITANo.35/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.The issueraisedbytheassesseeShriSanjayPMehtainIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022for AY2019-20hasbeendecidedbyusvideparagraphNo.11ofthisorderagainst theassessee.ThelearnedDRandtheARalsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethe findingsinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shall alsobeappliedtothepresentappealbearingITANo.35/Ahd/2022forthe assessmentyear2019-20inthecaseofSmt.TruptiSanjayMehta.Hence,the groundofappealfiledbytheassesseeisherebydismissed. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 29 38.2ComingtotheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundNo.5ofthe captionedappeal.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytheassessee videsaidgroundofappealisidenticaltotheissueraisedbytheassesseeinthe caseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022fortheassessment year2019-20.Therefore,thefindingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shallalso beapplicabletotheITANo.35/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.The issueraisedbytheassesseeShriSanjayPMehtainIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022for AY2019-20hasbeendecidedbyusvideparagraphNo.12ofthisorderinfavour theassessee.ThelearnedDRandtheARalsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethe findingsinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shall alsobeappliedtothepresentappealbearingITANo.35/Ahd/2022forthe assessmentyear2019-20inthecaseofSmt.TruptiSanjayMehta.Hence,the groundofappealfiledbytheassesseeisherebyallowed. 38.3Intheresulttheappealfiledbytheassesseeispartlyallowed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.56/Ahd/2022forA.Y2019-20bytheRevenuein caseofassessee“TruptiSanjayMehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2019-20 39.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytherevenueinthecaptioned appealinthecaseofSmt.TruptiSanjayMehtafortheAY2019-20isidenticalto theissueraisedbytheRevenueinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehtabearing IT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.Therefore,the findingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022shallalsobeapplicabletotheIT(SS)A No.56/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.Theissueraisedbythe RevenueinITANo.55/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20hasbeendecidedbyusvide paragraphNo.13ofthisorderagainsttherevenue.ThelearnedDRandtheAR alsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethefindingsinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehta bearingIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022shallalsobeappliedtothepresentappeal bearingIT(SS)ANo.56/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20inthecaseof IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 30 Smt.TruptiSanjayMehta.Hence,thegroundofappealfiledbytherevenueis dismissed. 39.1Intheresult,theappealfiledbytherevenueisdismissed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.37/Ahd/2022bytheassessee“VishwaSanjay Mehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2019-20 40.TheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundNo.1&6ofthecaptioned appealfor2019-20isgeneralinnature,hencenotrequiredseparateadjudication. Likewise,theissueraisedinground2and3ofthecaptionedappealinconnection withtransferofjurisdictionu/s127oftheActhasnotbeenpressedbythelearned ARoftheassessee.Hence,thesameisdismissedasnotpressed. 40.1Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundNo. 4ofappealisidenticaltotheissueraisedbytheassesseeinthecaseofShri SanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019- 20.Therefore,thefindingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shallalsobe applicabletotheIT(SS)ANo.37/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.The issueraisedbytheassesseeShriSanjayPMehtainIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022for AY2019-20hasbeendecidedbyusvideparagraphNo.11ofthisorderagainst theassessee.ThelearnedARandtheDRalsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethe findingsinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shall alsobeappliedtothepresentappealbearingIT(SS)ANo.37/Ahd/2022forthe assessmentyear2019-20inthecaseofMissVishwaSanjayMehta.Hence,the groundofappealfiledbytheassesseeisherebydismissed. 40.2Comingtotheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundno.5ofthe captionedappeal.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytheassessee videsaidgroundofappealisidenticaltotheissueraisedbytheassesseeinthe caseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022fortheassessment IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 31 year2019-20.Therefore,thefindingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shallalso beapplicabletotheITANo.35/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.The issueraisedbytheassesseeShriSanjayPMehtainIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022for AY2019-20hasbeendecidedbyusvideparagraphNo.12ofthisorderinfavour theassessee.ThelearnedDRandtheARalsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethe findingsinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shall alsobeappliedtothepresentappealbearingITANo.35/Ahd/2022forthe assessmentyear2019-20inthecaseofMiss.VishwaSanjayMehta.Hence,the groundofappealfiledbytheassesseeisherebyallowed. 40.3Intheresult,theappealfiledbytheassesseeispartlyallowed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.57/Ahd/2022bytheRevenueincaseofassessee “VishwaSanjayMehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2019-20 41.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytherevenueinthecaptioned appealinthecaseofMissVishwaSanjayMehtafortheAY2019-20isidenticalto theissueraisedbytheassesseeinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehtabearing IT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.Therefore,the findingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022shallalsobeapplicabletotheIT(SS)A No.57/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.Theissueraisedbythe RevenueinITANo.56/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20hasbeendecidedbyusvide paragraphNo.13ofthisorderagainsttherevenue.ThelearnedDRandtheAR alsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethefindingsinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehta bearingIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022shallalsobeappliedtothepresentappeal bearingIT(SS)ANo.57/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20inthecaseof MissVishwaSanjayMehta.Hence,thegroundofappealfiledbytherevenueis dismissed. 41.1Intheresult,theappealfiledbytherevenueisdismissed. IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 32 ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.21/Ahd/2022bytheRevenueincaseofassessee “GauravSanjayMehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2014-15 42.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytherevenueinthecaptioned appealinthecaseofShriGauravSanjayMehtafortheAY2014-15isidenticalto theissueraisedbytherevenueinthecaseofSmt.TruptiSMehtabearing IT(SS)ANo.22/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2014-15.Therefore,the findingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.22/Ahd/2022shallalsobeapplicabletotheIT(SS)A No.21/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2014-15.Theissueraisedbythe revenueinITA(SS)No.22/Ahd/2022forAY2014-15hasbeendecidedbyusvide paragraphNo.33ofthisorderagainsttheRevenue.ThelearnedDRandtheAR alsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethefindingsinthecaseofTruptiSMehta bearingIT(SS)ANo.22/Ahd/2022forAY2014-15shallalsobeappliedtothe presentappealbearingIT(SS)ANo.21/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2014- 15inthecaseofShriGauravSanjayMehta.Hence,thegroundsofappealfiledby therevenuearedismissed. 42.1Intheresult,appealfiledbytherevenueisherebydismissed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.36/Ahd/2022bytheassessee“GauravSanjay Mehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2019-20 43.TheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundNo.1&6ofthecaptioned appealfor2019-20isgeneralinnature,hencenotrequiredseparateadjudication. Likewise,theissueraisedinground2and3ofthecaptionedappealinconnection withtransferofjurisdictionu/s127oftheActhasnotbeenpressedbythelearned ARoftheassessee.Hence,thesameisdismissedasnotpressed. 43.1Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundno. 4ofthecaptionedappealisidenticaltotheissueraisedbytheassesseeinthe caseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022fortheassessment IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 33 year2019-20.Therefore,thefindingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shallalso beapplicabletotheIT(SS)ANo.36/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20. TheissueraisedbytheassesseeinITA(SS)No.34/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20has beendecidedbyusvideparagraphNo.11ofthisorderagainsttheassessee.The learnedARandtheDRalsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethefindingsinthecase ofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20shallalso beappliedtothepresentappealbearingIT(SS)ANo.36/Ahd/2022forthe assessmentyear2019-20inthecaseofGauravSanjayMehta.Hence,theground ofappealfiledbytheassesseeisherebydismissed. 43.2Comingtotheissueraisedbytheassesseevidegroundno.5ofthe captionedappeal.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytheassessee videsaidgroundofappealisidenticaltotheissueraisedbytheassesseeinthe caseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022fortheassessment year2019-20.Therefore,thefindingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022shallalso beapplicabletotheIT(SS)ANo.36/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20. TheissueraisedbytheassesseeinITA(SS)No.34/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20has beendecidedbyusvideparagraphNo.12ofthisorderinfavourtheassessee. ThelearnedARandtheDRalsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethefindingsinthe caseofShriSanjayPMehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.34/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20 shallalsobeappliedtothepresentappealbearingIT(SS)ANo.36/Ahd/2022for theassessmentyear2019-20inthecaseofGauravSanjayMehta.Hence,the groundofappealfiledbytheassesseeisherebyallowed. 43.3Intheresult,theappealfiledbytheassesseeispartlyallowed. ComingtoIT(SS)ANo.58/Ahd/2022bytheRevenueincaseofassessee “GauravSanjayMehta”pertainingtotheA.Y.2019-20. 44.Attheoutset,wenotethattheissueraisedbytheRevenueinthe captionedappealinthecaseofShriGuaravSanjayMehtafortheAY2019-20is IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 34 identicaltotheissueraisedbytheRevenueinthecaseofShriSanjayPMehta bearingIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.Therefore, thefindingsgiveninIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022shallalsobeapplicabletothe IT(SS)ANo.58/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear2019-20.Theissueraisedby theRevenueinITA(SS)No.55/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20hasbeendecidedbyus videparagraphNo.13ofthisorderagainsttheRevenue.ThelearnedDRandthe ARalsoagreedthatwhateverwillbethefindingsinthecaseofShriSanjayP MehtabearingIT(SS)ANo.55/Ahd/2022forAY2019-20shallalsobeappliedto thepresentappealbearingIT(SS)ANo.58/Ahd/2022fortheassessmentyear 2019-20inthecaseofShriGauravSanjayMehta.Hence,thegroundofappeal filedbytheRevenueisherebydismissed. 44.1Intheresult,theappealfiledbytheRevenueisdismissed. Inthecombinedresult: Sr. No. IT(SS)ANo. Assessment Year AppealbyResult 1- 2. No.34& 30/Ahd/2022 2019-20 & 2020-21 Assessee Boththeappealsof theassesseeare partlyallowed. 3- 4. No.55& 38/Ahd/2022 2019-20 & 2020-21 RevenueDismissed 5-6 Nos.22& 23/Ahd/2022 2014-15 & 2017-18 RevenueDismissed 7.No.35/Ahd/2022 2019-20Assessee Partlyallowed 8.No.56/Ahd/2022 2019-20 Revenue Dismissed 9.No.37/Ahd/20222019-20 Assessee Partlyallowed 10.No.57/Ahd/2022 2019-20 RevenueDismissed IT(SS)Anos.34&55/AHD/2022with11others Asstt.Year2019-20 35 11- 12 Nos.21& 58/Ahd/2022 2014-15 & 2019-20 Revenue Boththeappealsare Dismissed 13No.36/Ahd/20222019-20 Assessee Partlyallowed OrderpronouncedintheCourton20/03/2024atAhmedabad. Sd/-Sd/- (MADHUMITAROY)(WASEEMAHMED) JUDICIALMEMBERACCOUNTANTMEMBER (TrueCopy) Ahmedabad;Dated20/03/2024 Manish