MR. Sunil Agrawal, Bhopal V. The ACIT Circle 3(1), Bhopal

ITSSA 43/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1336 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 06-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV VARSHANEY
• Assessee Lawyers: L N MALIK; MANISH MALIK CAS
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Search and seizure; Assessment record; Tax effect
• Section: 69C; 142(1); 153A; 15

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS : 2004-05 TO 2010-11 ACIT, MR.SUNIL AGRAWAL, CIRCLE 3(1), VS 188,PUL BOGDA, BHOPAL JINSI, JAHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. ADQPA5192G I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.YS : 2008-09 & 2009-10 MR.SUNIL AGRAWAL, ACIT, 188,PUL BOGDA, VS CIRCLE 3(1), JIN SI, JAHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL BHOPAL APPELLANT RESPONDENT ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 2 2 DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJEEV VARSHANEY, CIT DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI L.N.MALIK & SHRI MANISH MALIK, CAS O R D E R PER BENCH THESE ARE NINE APPEALS SEVEN APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT AND TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE, RELATE TO ASSESSME NT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2010-11. 2. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A SEARCH AN D SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132(1) OF INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, HAS B EEN CARRIED OUT ON 04.02.2010 AT THE OFFICE-CUM-RESIDENTIAL PRE MISES OF ASSESSEE SITUATED AT 188, PUL BOGDA, JINSHI, JAHANG IRABAD, BHOPAL. FOLLOWING RETURNS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE AS SESSEE :- DATE OF HEARING : 06.10.2015. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.12 . 2015 ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 3 3 S.NO. A.Y. DATE OF RETURN RETURNED INCOME (RS.) ASSESSED INCOME (RS) 1 2004-05 05.09.2006 46,600 2,71,600 2 2005-06 05.09.2006 98,500 3,73,500 3 2006-07 05.09.2006 1,11,460 7,56.960 4 2007-08 11.04.2008 3,96,010 12,10,660 5 2008-09 23.01.2009 4,56,080 27.91.080 6 2009-10 16.04.2010 4,40,240 24,03,930 7 2010-11 26.12.2011 5,21,430 17,04,130 4. THE COMMON GROUNDS IN ALL THE SEVEN YEARS RELATE TO ADDITION OF RS. 29,15,000/- MADE FOR DRAWINGS FOR H OUSE HOLD EXPENSES. WHILE MAKING THE SAID ADDITION, THE AO HA S MENTIONED AS UNDER :- DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESS EE WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS OF HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES INCLUDING AMOUNT SPENT, TUITION AND OTHER CHARGES S PENT ON CHILDRENS EDUCATION, PETROL EXPENSES, TELEPHONE EXPENSES, ELECTRICITY EXPENSES, MOBILE BILLS AND SO CIAL CEREMONIES ORGANIZE DURING THE PERIOD. THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE SMT. RENU AGRAWAL AND MOTHER SMT. MANORAMA BAI HAS NOT FILED REGULAR RETURNS U/S 139(1) AND HE NCE HAS NOT CLAIMED ANY HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. SHRI KAILA SH ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 4 4 CHAND AGRAWAL FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO DENIE D HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES SPENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE . THUS THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PREPARE A FUND FLOW STATEMENT COMMENSURATING THE EXPENSES WITH THE INCO ME RETURNS FILED BY HIM IN DUE COURSE. DESPITE VARIOUS REMINDERS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVIDE THE REQUIR ED DETAILS. KEEPING IN VIEW THE SOCIAL STATUS OF THE A SSESSEE AND THE LIFE STYLE APPEARED TO BE LIVED BY HIM FOLL OWING AMOUNTS ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES ARE ADDED TO THE INCOME AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE INCURRED BUT NOT SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME DURING THE FOLLOWINGS ASSESSMENT YEARS:- ASSESSMENT YEAR AMOUNT (RS.) 2004-05 225000 2005-06 275000 2006-07 3500000 2007-08 4250000 2008-09 4900000 2009-10 550000 2010-11 600000 TOTAL RS. 2915000 ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 5 5 5. THE MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. C IT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 4.2 APPELLANTS SUBMISSIONS ALONGWITH ASSESSME NT ORDER HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED CAREFULLY. ASSESSMENT RECORDS HAVE ALSO BEEN PERUSED. NOTICES U/S 153A HA VE BEEN ISSUED ON 28.04.2011. A COMMON DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE ALONGWITH NOTICE U/S 142(1) HAS BEEN ISSUED ON 05.08.2011 ASKING THE APPELLANT TO GIVE DETAILS OF HIS INCOME, EXPLAIN LOOSE AND OTHER SEIZ ED PAPERS, BANK ACCOUNTS ENTRIES, INVESTMENTS MADE AND CASH AND JEWELLERY FOUND DURING SEARCH. NO DETAIL WHATSOEVER REGARDING HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES BEEN ASKED FOR IN QUESTIONNAIRE, THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN ASKED TO JUSTIFY WITHDRAWALS FOR HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES IN VIEW OF PROPOSED ADDITION IN THIS HEAD VIDE ORDER SHEET ENT RY DATED 23.12.2011. VIDE LETTER DATED 28.12.2011, THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED YEAR-WISE DETAILS OF HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES AS UNDER :- ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 6 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR AMOUNT (RS.) 2004-05 25000 2005-06 1,00,000 2006-07 33,727 2007-08 1,91,268 2008-09 73,087 2009-10 2,65,960 2010-11 2,85,268 IN ADDITION, RENTAL INCOME RECEIVED BY HIS WIFE SMT. RENU AGRAWAL IN RESPECT OF HER CHENNAI PROPERTY IS ALSO STATED TO BE USED FOR MEETING HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND RECORDS, THE AO HAS MADE NO FURTHER ENQUIRY NOR SOUGHT ANY OTHER EXPLANATION BUT HAS PROCEEDED TO MAKE IMPUGNED ADDITION WITHOUT GIVING ANY BASIS OR JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SAME. THE APPELLANT IS FOUND TO BE LIVING IN JOINT FAMILY ALONGWITH HIS PARENTS, AS IS EVIDENT DURING SEARCH OPERATIONS. TOTAL HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES OF THE FAMILY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE DECLARED AS UNDER FOR THE YEARS UN DER APPEAL :- ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 7 7 CONTRIBUTION IN HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES FORM A.Y. TOTAL HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES SUNIL AGARWAL (AS DECLARED) (RS.) KAILASH AGARWAL (AS DECLARED) (RS.) MANORAM A AGARWAL (AS DECLARED)( RS.) RENU AGARWAL(A S ASSESSED BY AO)(RS.) ASSESSED BY AO IN APPELLANT S HANDS (I.E. SUNIL AGARWAL) (RS.) 2004-05 1,43590 25,000 58,000 6590 42,110 2,25,000 2005-06 2,73,690 1,00,000 1,38,690 -- 46,320 2,75,000 2006-07 1,81,227 33,727 1,47,500 -- 50,950/- 3,50,000 2007-08 3,88,268 1,91,268 1,92,000 5,000 56,050 4,25,000 2008-09 4,18,087 73,087 3,00,000 -- 61,650 4,90,000 2009-10 5,66,302 2,65,960 1,41,852 1,08,490 67,820 5,50,000 2010-11 6,51,700 2,85,268 1,26,432/ - 2,00,000 74,600 6,00,000 A.O. HAS ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES IN APPELLANT'S HANDS ALONE, AS ABOVE, AS AGAINST DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT AND HIS FAMILY AS PER THE IR RETURNS. IT IS FURTHER SEEN THAT THE SAME A.O. HAS NOT MADE ANY SEPARATE ADDITION FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 8 8 EITHER IN SHRI KAILASH AGARWAL OR IN CASE OF SMT. MANORAMA AGARWAL CASES AS PER THEIR RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED U/S 153A/143(3) OF THE IT ACT FOR THESE SEVEN YEARS. ADDITION MADE IN CASE OF SMT. RENU AGARWAL HAS ALREADY BEEN INCORPORATED ABOVE. FURTHER, A.O. HAS NOT MADE ANY ENQUIRY WITH REFERENCE TO SPECI FIC ITEM OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE AND ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE ONLY ON PRESUMPTIONS AND ESTIMATION. NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE APPELLANT HAS INCURRED MORE EXPENDITURE THAN TOTAL DECLARED OR THAT THE EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN MADE OUTSIDE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THIS IS DESPITE THE FACT THAT EXTENSIVE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATIONS HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT AT BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE APPELLA NT AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. BANK STATEMENTS OF THE APPELLANT AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE ALSO BEEN SEEN. ADDITION IN THE APPELLANT'S HANDS IS FOUND TO BE BASED ON PURE ESTIMATION WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 9 9 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE S AME. IN FACT, FOR A. Y. 2010 - 11, TOTAL HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES DECLARED AT RS. 6,51,700/- ARE FOUND MORE THAN ESTIMATED BY TILE A.O. AT RS. 6,00,000/-. IT IS A SETTLED LEGAL POSITION THAT SEI ZED MATERIAL HAS TO BE READ AND ACCEPTED AS A WHOLE AND IT IS NOT PERMISSIBLE TO MAKE FURTHER ESTIMATES THEREFROM UNLESS AND UNTIL THERE IS COGENT MATERIAL IN SUPPORT OF UNDERTAKING SUCH AN EXERCISE. THERE I S NO DENYING THE FACT THAT IN CASES WHERE NOTICE U/S 153A BEEN ISSUED, A.O. IS AUTHORISED TO RECOMPUTE THE INCOME EVEN IF EARLIER ASSESSMENT IS COMPLETED U/S 143(1)/143(3) BUT IT IS REQUIRED TO BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE FOUND DURING SEARCH OR BEING RELATED TO IT. THERE IS NO ROOM FOR MAKING ROUTINE DISALLOWANCES WHILE MAKING SEARCH CASES ASSESSMENTS ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE IS NO MATERIAL DETECTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATIONS OR BROUGHT ON RECORD IN POST SEARCH INVESTIGATIONS AND DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR MAKING SUCH ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 10 10 DISALLOWANCE. THIS HAS BEEN HELD BY HON'BLE ITAT, MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF POOJA BHATT VS ACIT, (2007) 73 ITD 205 (MUM). ON SIMILAR FACTS SAME VIEW HAS ALSO BEEN HELD BY HON'BLE ITAT, AGRA IN CASE OF SHR I PRAVEEN GUPTA AND SMT. POONAM GUPTA IN ITA NO.155 AND 156/AGRA/2011 VIDE ORDER DTD. 23.03.2012. 4.3 FURTHER TO INVOKE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 69C FOR UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE A.O. IS REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH CONDITION PRECEDENT AS TO EXISTENCE OF SU CH EXPENDITURE BY EVIDENCE/MATERIAL ON RECORD TO JUSTIFY ADDITION BY ENUMERATING VARIOUS ITEMS OF PROVED UNDISCLOSED EXPENDITURE DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR AS HELD BY HON'BLE ITAT AHMADABAD BENCH IN CASE OF PRADEEP C. PATEL VS CIT, (1997) 58 TTJ 409. SINCE THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN DONE BY THE A.O. AND IN VIEW OF FACTS ABOVE, ESTIMATED TOTAL ADDITION OF RS. 29,15,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 11 11 EXPE NSES FOR THESE SEVEN YEARS UNDER APPEAL IS N OT FOUND SUSTAINABLE AND ACCORDINGLY DELETED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS MADE A CHART OF CONTRIBUTION IN HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES FROM VARIOUS ASSESSEES AND THE AO HAS NOT MADE FURTHER ENQUIRY REGARDING THE FAMILY AS TO WHETHER THE FAMILY IS JOINTLY STAYING OR NOT. THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN THE CONTRIBUTION MADE BY RESPECTIVE PERSONS WHICH IS DECLARED AND TH AT IS ALSO RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. MOREOVER, THE ASS ESSEE HAS GIVEN ALL THESE DETAILS. THE LD. CIT DR COULD NOT P RODUCE ANY EVIDENCE CONTRARY AGAINST THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A) . THEREFORE, WE CONFIRM THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A). 7. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMISSED ON THIS GROUND. MOREOVER, WE FIND THAT IN ALL THE DEPARTMEN TS APPEALS, THE TAX EFFECT IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT. THERE FORE, THE DEPARTMENTS APPEALS ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE. THEREFOR E, WE DISMISS THE SAME. ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 12 12 8. IN I.T.(SS ).A.NOS. 52 TO 55/IND/2014 , COMMON GROUNDS RELATE TO DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 19,18,150/- U /S 68 MADE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 ON ACCOUNT OF C ASH DEPOSITED IN PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ACCOUNT BY TREATI NG THEM AS UNEXPLAINED. WHILE MAKING THE ADDITION, THE AO HAS MENTIONED AS UNDER :- THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED VIDE QUESTIONNA IRE ISSUED U/S 142(1) DATED 05.08.2011 TO PROVIDE DETAILS OF ALL B ANK ACCOUNTS HELD IN HIS NAME (INCLUDING JOINT ACCOUNT) AND ALSO TO PROVIDE DETAILED FUND FLOW STATEMENTS REFLE CTING ALL CREDITS AND WITHDRAWALS OF ALL THE BANK ACCOUNT S. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ASKED TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE VARIOUS ACCOUNTS NOT BE TREATE D AS UNEXPLAINED. ALSO IT IS FOUND THAT ASSESSEE IS HAVI NG VARIOUS CASH/CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS FOR WHICH NO EXPLANATION IS PROVIDED FOR THE SOURCE THEREOF, THE SAID CASH/CREDITS ARE BEING ADDED FOR IN THE RESPECTIVE YEAR AS PER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 68. ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 13 13 THE SCRUTINY OF PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, MARWARI R OAD, BHOPAL A/C NO. 0054000100122393 REVEALS THE FOLLOWING CREDITS OVER A PERIOD 2004-05 TO 2009-10 : A.Y. AMOUNT 2006 - 07 2,95,500 2007 - 08 3,89,650 2008 - 09 8,45,000 2009 - 10 3,88,000 TOTAL RS. 19,18,150 9. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THE DETAILS ASKED FOR AND SUBMITTED COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT EXPLAINING THE NATURE AND SOURCES OF ALL TH E CREDIT AND DEBIT ENTRIES APPEARING IN BANK ACCOUNT. THE AO MAD E THE ADDITIONS WITHOUT VERIFYING THE VARIABLE FACTS AVAI LABLE IN RECORD. THUS, THE ADDITION IS UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND DESE RVES TO BE DELETED. 10. THE MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. C IT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 14 14 5.2 APPELLANT'S SUBMISSIONS ALONG WITH ASSESSMENT ORDER AND RECORDS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED CAREFULLY. BANK STATEMENT OF PNB A/C NO.0054000100122393 HAS ALSO BEEN PERUSED. THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN ASKED 10 GIVE EXPLANATION TO THE AMOUNTS OF CREDITS AND DEBITS DONE IN VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS (SI NO. 1 TO 28) DURING THE PERIOD RELEVAN T TO A. Y. 2004-05 TO 2010-11 VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE DTD 05.08.2011. VIDE LETTER DTD 16.08.2011, THE APPELLA NT HAS SUBMITTED AS UNDER: '8. BANK ACCOUNTS MENTIONED AT S.NO.1 10 29 EXCEPT ACCOUNT MENTIONED 01 S.NO.2 BELONGS TO OUR CONCERNS AND FAMILY MEMBERS. IN CASE OF BUSINESS CONCERNS ACCOUNTS, THEY ARE REFLECTED IN REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE RELEVANT EXPLANATIONS SHALL B E MADE AVAILABLE TO YOUR HONOUR WHEN SPECIFICALLY CALLED FOR. THE TOTAL OF PAGES IN THESE ACCOUNTS AR E NO/LESS THAN 500. ' ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 15 15 SAME SU BMISSIONS HAVE BEEN FOUND REITERATED BY THE APPELLANT VIDE LETTER DTD 24.08.2011. VIDE ORDER SH EET ENTRY DTD 23.12.2011, THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN ASKED TO EXPLAIN DEPOSITS IN HIS PNB A/C NO.22393 OVER VARIOUS YEARS. IN RESPONSE, SHRI R.C. BAHETI, AR HA S APPEARED ON 28.12.2011 AND MADE SUBMISSIONS REGARDING BANK ACCOUNT ENTRIES GIVING DETAILS OF EA CH DEPOSIT, AS MENTIONED IN THE BANK STATEMENT ITSELF. A.O. HAS ALSO NOTED THAT APPELLANT HAS MADE SUBMISSIONS. NO FURTHER EXPLANATION SOUGHT FROM THE APPELLANT THEREAFTER NOR ANY ADVERSE COMMENTS ARE FOUND RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS. THUS, AO' S JUSTIFICATION FOR TREATING THESE DEPOSITS AS UNEXPL AINED IN ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FROM THE APPELLANT IS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE. AFTER PERUSAL OF APPELLANT'S SUBMISSIONS AS ABOVE, BANK STATEMENTS AND RECORDS, AO IS NOT FOUND JUSTIFIED IN MAKING IMPUGNED ADDITI ON OF RS. 19,18,150/- FOR A.YS. 2006-07 TO 2009-10, AS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ADDITION IS ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 16 16 FOUND TO HAVE BEEN MADE WITHOUT ANY BASIS, JUSTIFICATION, IN ABSENCE OF ANY ADVERSE MATERIAL O N RECORD, IN A MOST CASUAL MANNER AND IS NOT EVEN FOUND PERTAINING TO THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS FOR WHICH IT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . ACCORDINGLY, ADDITION OF RS. 19,18,150/- IS NOT FOU ND SUSTAINABLE AND HEREBY DELETED. 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS VERIFIED THE BANK STATEMENTS OF PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AND EXPLA INED BANK ACCOUNT ENTRIES BY GIVING DETAILS OF CASH DEPOSIT A S MENTIONED IN THE BANK STATEMENT. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR MAKING THIS ADDITION. THEREFORE, HE HAS DELETED THE ADDITION. 12. WE FIND THAT DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEED INGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN THE DETAILS OF SUMMARY SUBMI TTED TO THE AO , WHICH READS AS UNDER :- ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 17 17 THE UNDER NOTED BANK SUMMARY IS BEING SUBMITTED :- PNB A/C NO. 0054000100122393 BALANCE AS ON 1.4.2006 25,105/- UTI MATURITY AMOUNT 3,76,292/- INTEREST 745/- AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN BANK 2,95,500/- 6,97,642/- CASH WITHDRAWAL DURING THE YEAR 4,71,000/- AVANCE TO R.K. SHUKLA 75,000/- REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 40,367/- LIC PAYMENT & OTHER EXPENSES 1,08,100/- BANK BALANCE AS ON 31.03.2007 3,175/- 6,97,642/- CASH AVAILABLE WITH ASSESSEE AS ON 31.03.2007 WAS RS. 1,75,500/- (RS 4,71,000/- WITHDRAWN FROM BANK LESS (-) RS. 2,95,500/- DEPOSITED IN BANK. THE ABOVE STATEMENT REVEALS THE SU M OF RS. 2,95,500/- IN BANK OUT OF KNOWN AND EXPLAINED SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DOING LIAISONING FOR OTH ER COMPANIES. THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY HIM THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL FOR LIAISONING WORK ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 18 18 REFLECTED IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT IS NOT DOUBTED, THEN HOW THE AMOUNT RECEIVED AGAINST SUCH EXPENSES DULY DEPOSITED IN BANK WAS DOUBTED AND ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE ADDITION OF RS. 2,95,500/- UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW, HYPOTHETICAL, ARBITRARY AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED. ALTERNATIVELY SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PARTNER OF G.S. OIL MILL UPTO 6.3.2006 WHICH ENGAGED IN BUSINESS OF DEVELOPER AND SELLER OF FLATS/SHOPS KNOWN CENTRE POINT. THE ASSESSEE AS PARTNER WAS MAINLY DEALING THE TRANSACTION CONNECTED TO SALE OF FIATS/SHOPS. THE AFORESAID FIRM AS A MAILER OF ABANDON PRE-CAUTION DECLARED RS. 17,35,700/- FOR TAXATION AND PAID LAX THEREON. THE AMOUNT SO DECLARED AS INCOME WAS ALSO VERY MUCH AVAILABLE WITH ASSESSEE AS A PARTNER TO MEET THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AND ALSO DEPOSIT IN HIS ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 19 19 PERSONAL BANK ACCOUNT. THE VERY FACT OF THE CASE CAN NOT BE OVERRULED AND KEEP ASIDE. ' SIMILARLY, FOR A.YS. 2007-08 TO 20 09-10, THE APPELLANT HAS EXPLAINED BANK DEPOSITS ADDED TO HIS INCOME AS UNEXPLAINED BUT WHICH PERTAINS TO SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS, AS UNDER: ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08: BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2007 3, 175/- CASH DEPOSITED AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN BANK 2.64.650/- RECEIVED FROM G.S.ROLLER AND FLOUR MILL DEPOSITED 1,25,000/- INTEREST 3,89,650 RECEIVED FROM R.K. SHUKLA 1,040 DIVIDEND 22,500 4,66,696 CASH WITHDRAWAL DURING THE YEAR 8,000 ADVANCE TO SMT. SANGEETA GUPTA 1,50,000 ADVANCE TO SHRI PUR ANCHAND GUPTA 75,000 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 1,31,009 WITHDRAWAL FOR EXPENSES 47,096 BANK COMMISSION 338 LAPTOP PURCHASED 47,500 BANK BALANCE AS ON 31.3.2008 7,753 TOTAL 4,66,696 CASH SUMMARY : OPENING BALANCE 1,75,500 FROM G. S. ROLLER AND F LOUR MILLS 1,25,000 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES RECEIVED (07 - 08) 50,000 RECEIVED FROM R.K. SHUKLA 25,000 CASH WITHDRAWN FROM BANK 8,000 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES RECEIVED (06 - 07) 40,367 4,23,867 DEPOSITED IN BANK 3,89,6650 CASH IN HAND (31.03.2008) 34,2 17 4,23,867 ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 20 20 THE ABOVE STATEMENT REVEALS THE SUM OF RS. 3,89,650 /- DEPOSITED IN BANK OUT OF KNOWN AND EXPLAINED SOURCES. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2008 7,753/- CASH DEPOSITED AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN BANK OUT OF CASH IN HAND 49,000 RECEIVED FROM SHRI PURANCHAND 75,000 RECEIVED FROM SMT. SANGEETA 1,50,000 RECEIVED AGAINST REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES (07-08) 81,000 RECEIVED AGAINST REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES CURRENT YEAR (08-09) 4,90,000 8,45,000 INTEREST 235 8,52,988 CASH WITHDRAWAL DURING THE YEAR 50,000 DOLLAR PURCHASE 40,000 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 5,20,682 WITHDRAWAL FOR EXPENSES 40,571 LIC 199538 BANK BALANCE AS ON 31.3.2009 2,197 8,52,988 CASH SUMMARY : OPENING BALANCE 34217 FROM SHRI PURAN CHAND GUPTA 75000 FROM SMT. SANGEETA GUPTA 150000 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES RECEIVED (07 - 08) 81000 CASH WITHDRAWN FROM BANK 50000 REIMBURSABLE EXP ENSES RECEIVED (08 - 09) 490000 8,80,217 DEPOSITED IN BANK 845000 CASH IN HAND (31.03.2009 35217 880217 THE ABOVE STATEMENT REVEALS THE SUM OF RS. 845000 D EPOSITED IN BANK OUT OF KNOWN AND EXPLAINED SOURCES. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 21 21 BALANCE AS ON 1.4.2009 CASH DEPOSITED 2,197 AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN BANK OUT OF CASH IN HAND 35,000 RECEIVED AGAINST REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES LAST YEAR (08- 09) 30,000 RECEIVED AGAINST REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES CURRENT YEAR )09-10) 243000 CASH DEPOSITED OUT OF CASH OF CURRENT YEAR 80,000 3,88,000 INTEREST 132 CHEQUE DEPOSITED OUT OF CURRENT YEAR (09-10) 2,50,800 6,41,129/ - CASH WITHDRAWAL DURING THE YEAR 92,500/ - REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 526785 / - BANK CHARGES 690/ - WITHDRAWAL FOR EXPENSES 20000 / - BANK BALANCE AS ON 31.3.2010 1154/ - 641129 / - CASH SUMMARY OPENING BALANCE 35217 / - REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES RECEIVED (0 - 8 - 09) 30000 / - CASH WITHDRAWN FROM BANK 92500 / - REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES RECEIVED (08 - 09) 243000 / - 423867 / - DEPOSITED IN BANK 3,88,000 / - PERSONAL WITHDRAWAL 12717 / - TOTAL 400717 / - EXPENSES RECOVERABLE BALANCE RS. 32,985/- ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 22 22 THE ABOVE STATEMENT REVEALS THE SUM OF RS. 3,88,000/ - DEPOSITED IN BANK OUR OF KNOWN AND EXPLAINED SOURCES. 13. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS VERIFIED THESE DETAILS AND DELET ED THE ADDITION. THEREFORE, OUR INTERFERENCE IS NOT REQUIR ED. 14. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE DISMISS ED. 15. THE NEXT GROUND RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS. 20 LACS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND 2009-10 MADE ON ACCOUN T OF FOREIGN TOUR EXPENSES. 16. THE AO MADE THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 'DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH DETAILS OF FOREIGN TRAVELS UNDERTA KEN BY HIM ALONG WITH HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. THE PURPOSE O F VISIT WAS ASKED TO BE RELATED WITH BUSINESS NEED. A LSO FARE DETAILS, LODGING AND BOARDING EXPENSES, LOCAL CONVEYANCE CHARGES ALONG WITH PURCHASES MADE DURING THE STAY WERE ASKED TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE FOREIGN VISITS WERE MADE TO THE COUNT RIES OF UAE, INDONESIA, HUNGRY AND MALAYSIA. DURING THE SEARCH PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE ACCEPTED A CONVERSION OF INDIAN RUPEES TO 1000 DOLLARS WHICH COMES TO NEARLY ABOUT RS.45000/- THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO VERIFY THE ENTRIES SO APPEARING IN THE BOO KS OF ACCOUNTS. DESPITE VARIOUS REMINDERS THE ASSESSEE ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 23 23 FAILED TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED DETAILS. ACCORDINGLY , FOLLOWING AMOUNTS ARE ADDED TO INCOME AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE INCURRED DURING THE/OUR ABOVE MENTIONED FOREIGN TOURS. A.Y. AMOUNT 2008-09 10,00,000 2009-10 10,00,000 TOTAL RS. 20,00,000/- 17. THE MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. C IT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 9 LACS AND REST OF TH E ADDITION HAVE BEEN DELETED BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 6.2 APPELLANT'S SUBMISSIONS ALONG WITH ASSESSMENT ORDER AND RECORDS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED CAREFULLY. V IDE LETTER DTD 26.12.2011 THE APPELLANT HAS GIVEN DETAI LS OF FOREIGN TOURS MADE TO SINGAPORE. BALI (18.04.2009 T O 24.04.2009), HUNGARY ( 19.08.2009 TO 26.08.2009) AN D DUBAI (28.08.2008 TO 01.09.2008). FOR EACH OF THE T OUR, IT ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 24 24 IS MENTIONED THAT TICKET AND STAY SPONSORED BY MR. SATISH GOEL IND ENERGY LTD. NO OTHER DETAIL WHATSOEVER BEE N GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT. AS PER THE APPELLANT, SINCE IT HAS NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE ON THESE TOURS BEING SPONSORED BY MR. SATISH GOEL, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN CL AIMED BY HIM. HENCE, NO ENTRY BEEN MADE IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS EITHER. THUS, THESE TOURS HAVE BEEN UNDERT AKEN BY THE APPELLANT ALONG WITH HIS FAMILY MEMBERS FOR NON BUSINESS PURPOSES. JUSTIFICATION FOR THEIR SPONSORS HIP BY MR. SATISH GOEL NOR APPELLANT'S RELATION-PERSONAL O R BUSINESS-WITH SAID MR. GOEL BEEN GIVEN AT ANY STAGE BY THE APPELLANT. DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDI NGS, THE APPELLANT HAS FILED ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INCOME TAX RE TURN FOR A. Y. 2008-09 OF SHRI SATISH GOEL C/O M/S JAGDAMBA ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT LTD, 624 URLA INDL AREA, RAI PUR DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 47,04,030/-. HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT IN ANY WAY JUSTIFY AND PROVE THE FACT OF SPONSO RSHIP OF PERSONAL FOREIGN TOURS OF THE APPELLANT AND HIS FAM ILY BY MR. GOEL. INVENTORY MADE OF APPELLANT'S PASSPORT FO UND ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 25 25 DURING THE SEARCH OPERATIONS SHOWS THAT HE HAS UNDERTAKEN FOREIGN TOURS TO UAE, INDONESIA, HUNGARY AND MALAYSIA (THROUGH ANY SUCH TOUR TO MALAYSIA BEEN DE NIED BY THE APPELLANT) AND THERE HAS BEEN CONVERSION OF INDIAN RUPEES TO FOREIGN CURRENCY WHICH ACCORDING TO THE A PPELLANT HAS BEEN DONE ONCE ONLY ON 21.05.2008 THROUGH WITHDRAWALS FROM HIS PNB ACCOUNT. THERE IS NO DENYI NG THE FACT THAT EXPENSES INCURRED ON THESE FOREIGN TO URS HAVE NOT BEEN ENTERED IN APPELLANT'S BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, ON ALLEGED GROUND OF SPONSORSHIP. THUS THERE IS NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO JUSTIFY AND PROV E THE EXPENSES INCURRED ON THESE TOURS. KEEPING IN VIEW A LL ABOVE. A.O. IS FOUND JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THESE FO REIGN TOUR EXPENSES AS UNEXPLAINED AND UNDISCLOSED. HOWEVER, KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACT OF DESTINATION AND DURATIO N OF THESE TOURS, NUMBER OF PASSENGERS, AIRFARES, BANK WITHDRAWALS ETC, ADDITION OF RS. 3,00,000/- FOR A. Y. 2009- 10 IN RESPECT OF DUBAI TOUR OF ONE WEEK AND RS.6,OO,OOO/- FOR A. Y. 2010-11 IN RESPECT OF TOURS TO SINGAPORE AND ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 26 26 HUNGARY FOR 2 WEEKS IS FOUND REASONABLE AND JUSTIFI ED. ACCORDINGLY, ADDITION OF RS. 9,00,000/- IS HEREBY, CONFIRMED OUT OF RS. 20,00,000/- MADE BY THE A.O. 18. THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 3 LACS AND RS. 6 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF FOREIGN TOUR IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 & 2010-11 RESPECTIVELY A ND THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST CONFIRMING THE ADDITI ON OF RS. 11 LACS. 19. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND LD. CIT DR R ELIED UPON THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 20. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 3 LA CS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND RS. 6 LACS IN RESPECT O F SINGAPORE AND HUNGARY ON THE GROUND THAT ONE SHRI SATISH GOEL HAD UNDERTAKEN THESE TOUR AND HE IS MANAGER OF IND ENER GY LIMITED, BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS UNDERTAKEN THE TOUR W ITH HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELET ED THE ACIT VS. SUNIL AGRAWAL, BHOPAL. -I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 50 TO 55/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 100/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 -05 TO 2010-11 SUNIL AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, L I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 42 & 43/IND/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 & 2 009-10 27 27 ADDITION OF RS. 9 LACS AND CONFIRMED THE BALANCE AM OUNT. OUR INTERFERENCE IS NOT REQUIRED. 21. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL A S OF DEPARTMENT ARE DISMISSED ON THESE GROUNDS. 22. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE DEPARTMENT AN D ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1ST DECEMBER, 2015. SD/- (B. C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- ( D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 1 ST DECEMBER, 2015. CPU* 27.10.11