The DCIT, Circle-3, Surat V. Shri Anwarbhai H.Lakahni, Surat

ITSSA 463/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0966 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-08-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R I PATEL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Income from undisclosed sources; Loose papers; Block assessment; Retraction

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: S H RI G. D. AGRAWAL , VICE PRESIDENT AND SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, CIRCLE - 3, SURAT (APPELLANT) VS SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI, 1, KARIMABAD SOCIETY, GHOD DOD ROAD, SURAT PAN: AADPL0632N (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI R. I. PATEL, CIT - D . R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 10 - 08 - 2 015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 - 08 - 2 015 / ORDER P ER : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THIS R EVENUE S AP PEAL FOR BLOCK PERIOD FROM 01.04.1986 TO 27.02.1997 , ARISES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - II, SURAT DATED 09 - 05 - 2011 IN APPEAL NO. CAS - II/395 /10 - 11, IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 158BC R.W.S. 254 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . I T (SS) A NO . 463 / A HD/ 20 11 BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.1986 TO 27.02.1997 I.T. (SS) A NO. 463 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. BLOCK PERIOD PAGE NO DCIT VS. SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI 2 2. THE REVENUE S SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GROUND CHALLENGES THE CIT(A) S ORDER DELETING ADDITION OF UNACCOUNTED PAYMENT OF RS. 20 LACS ADDED U/S. 158BC OF THE ACT. THE CASE FILE REVEALS THAT THE ORIGINAL ASSESSEE HAS EXPIRED. CASE CALLED TWICE. THE DECEASED ASSESSEE S LEGAL REP R ESENTATIVE STANDS SERVED THROUGH AN RPAD NOTICE . NONE HAS COME PRESENT. WE PROCEED EX - PARTE ACCORDINGLY AGAINST THE RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE S LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE. 3. THE ORIGINAL ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF METALS SCRAP TRADING. THE DEPARTME NT CONDUCTED A SEARCH IN HIS CASE ON 27 - 02 - 1997 LEADING TO SEIZURE OF ALLEGED INCRIMINATING MATERIAL. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED A BLOCK ASSESSMENT ON 30 - 03 - 1999 INTER ALIA ADDING A SUM OF RS. 31,53,217/ - INTRODUCED IN THE FAMILY BUSINESS AND AN AMOU NT OF R S. 45 LACS PAID/RECEIVED BY THE FAMILY. THE CIT(A) DELETED THE SAME IN HIS ORDER DATED 27 - 04 - 2000. THE REVENUE CAME IN APPEAL. A CO - ORDINATE BENCH RESTORED THE SAME BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ITS ORDER DATED 26 - 06 - 2009 AS UNDER: - 'WE FIND F ROM THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. DR AS WELL AS THE GROUNDS RAISED BEFORE US BY THE REVENUE, IT IS GATHERED, THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE LOOSE PAPERS SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF CAPITAL IN THE BUSINESS OF M/S. R.H. PAT EL & CO. AMOUNTING TO RS 31,53,217/ - . WE ALSO FIND THAT THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A) THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS FOUND FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NO AMOUNT OVER AND ABOVE RS 45 IAKHS WAS PAID IS NOT IN CONSONANCE WITH THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THE FACT IS THA T THE TOTAL CONSIDERATION WAS SETTLED AT RS. 65 LAKHS AS ADMITTED BY SHRI ANWARBHAI LAKHANI DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ON 27 - 02 - 1997. IT WAS ALSO STATED BY SHRI ANBARBHAI LAKHANI THAT RS. 25 LAKH WAS PAID BY CASH ABOUT ONE YEAR PRIOR TO SEARCH IN FIVE INS TALLMENTS OF RS. 5 LAKHS EACH. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT TEN SHOPS IN BELJIUM TOWER, SILVER PLAZA, NEAR LINEAR BUS STAND, RING ROAD,. SURAT VALUED AT RS. 20 LAKHS WAS ALSO HANDED OVER TO SHRI KISHORBHAI RATILAL NAIK. WE FIND THAT CI T(A) WAS NOT CONSIDERED T HESE FACTS, WHILE ALLOWING THE I.T. (SS) A NO. 463 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. BLOCK PERIOD PAGE NO DCIT VS. SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI 3 RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE NEEDS RE - EXAMINATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AFRESH. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL PROVIDE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEI NG HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK UP CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS . HE SOUG HT TO ADD THE IMPUGNED SUM OF R S. 20 LACS BEING UNACCOUNTED PAYMENT MADE TO SHRI KISHOREBHAI. HE PASSED CONSEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT ORDER ON 13 - 10 - 2010 RECORDING ASSESSEE S FAILURE IN FILING RESPONSE . THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY WOULD REFER TO EARLIER ASSESSMENT ORDER, ASSESSEE S STATEMENT RECORDED DURING SEARCH AND OBS ERVED ON THE ISSUE OF TOTAL UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT OF RS. 65 LACS THAT A SUM OF RS. 25 L ACS STOOD PAID ABOUT A YEAR BEFORE SEARCH IN INSTALLMENT OF RS. 5 LACS EACH, 10 SHOPS OF RS. 2 LACS EACH HAD BEEN GIVEN FOR RS. 20 LACS AND THE BALANCE SUM OF RS. 20 LA CS WAS YET TO BE PAID. HE QUOTED ASSE SSEE S CONDUCT IN OFFERING ONLY A SUM OF RS. 45 LACS FOR TAXATION. HE ALSO TOOK NOTICE OF THE FACT THAT THE LOOSE PAPERS SEIZED AS WELL AS THESE DEVELOPMENTS PROVED THAT A SUM OF RS. 6,53,217/ - WAS PAID OVER AND ABOVE RS. 45 LACS AND THE DEAL WAS STRUCK FOR RS. 65 LACS. THIS MADE HIM TO IGNORE ASSESSEE S RETRACTION AND RESULTED IN THE IM PUGNED ADDITION OF RS. 26,21,700 / - I.E. RS. 65 LACS - RS. 45 LACS = RS. 20 LACS+THE ABOVE SAID CASH PAYMENT S BEING MADE IN THE ASSESSE E S HANDS. 5. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AP PEAL. THE CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED HIS CORRESPONDING GROUNDS AS UNDER: - 8.2.1 THE SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST THE MERITS OF THE ADDIT ION. THE APPELLANT'S SUBMISSION , ON THIS GROUND OF APP EAL, REPRODUCED ABOVE, IS AL SO ON MERITS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ASSESSED THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AT RS. 26,21,710/ - , AS UNDER: I.T. (SS) A NO. 463 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. BLOCK PERIOD PAGE NO DCIT VS. SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI 4 (I) AS ADMITTED BY SHRI ANWARBHAI LAKHANI DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ON 27 - 02 - 1997 TOTAL CONSIDERATION AMOUNT FOR ACQUIRING OF 67% SHARE IN THE BUSINESS OF PETROL PUMP IN THE NAME OF M/S. R.H. PATEL & CO. FROM SHRI KISHORBHAI RATILAL NAIK WAS SETTLED FO R A CONSIDERATION OF F 65,00,000/ - , OUT OF WHICH RS. 25,0 0, 000/ - HAD ALREADY BEEN PAID IN CASH ABOUT ONE YEAR PRIOR TO S EARCH, IN FIVE INSTALLM ENT OF RS. 5 LAC EACH AND AMOUNT RS. 20,00,000/ - WAS PAID IN THE FORM OF VALUE OF TEN SHOPS IN BELGIUM TOWER, SILVER PLAZA, NEAR LINEAR BUS STAND, RING ROAD, SURAT, HANDED OVER TO SHRI K .R. NAIK, AND, THE BALANCE OF RS. 20,00,000/ - WAS PAY ABLE . (II) T HE AMOUNT OF RS. 20,00,000/ - I.E. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RS 65,00,000 ( - ) RS. 45,00,000 (RS. 25,00,000 + SHOPS VALUED AT RS. 20,00,000) CLAIMED TO BE PAYABLE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH, HAS BEEN ADDED ON THE GROUND THAT, ANNEXURE B - 3, OF THE PANCHNAMA WAS FOUN D AND SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH FROM THE PREMISES OF THE DECEAS ED APPELLANT ON 27 - 02 - 1997 AND PAGE NOS. 6 TO 8 OF THE SAME SHOW THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 31,53,217/ - HAS BEEN INTRODUCED IN CASH BY LAKHANI GROUP IN M/S. R.H. PATEL & CO. AND OUT OF THE S AME, RS. 45,00, 000/ - HAD ALREADY BEEN DISCLOSED BY BOTH GROUP. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO FOUND THAT SOME ENTRIES ON THE ABOVE PAGES WERE BY WAY OF CHEQUES AND INFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF M/S. R.H. PATEL & CO. AND AS A MATTER OF NORMAL I MPLICATION, IT PROVED THAT LAKHANI FAMILY HAD PAID RS. 6,53,217/ - OVER AND ABOVE THE AMOUNT OF RS. 25,00,000/ - (PAID IN INSTALLMENT OF RS. 5 LAC E ACH) FOR THE TOTAL DEAL STRUCK RS. 65,00, 000/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS THUS HELD TH AT THE PROOF OF PAYMENT OF RS. 20,00,000/ - WAS IN THE F ORM OF EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT OF RS. 6,53, 217/ - FOUND ON PAGES 6 TO 8 OF THE SEIZED DOCUMENT ANNEXURE - B 3 . (III) THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO ADDED RS. 6,21, 710/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME WHICH IS REPRE SENTED BY UNEXPLA INED INVESTMENT IN FURNITURE & FIXTURES (RS. 40,800/ - ), CASH SEIZED (RS. 5,71,170) AND FD IN SARDAR SAROVAR NIGAM LTD. (RS. 10,000/ - ), WHICH HAS BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED APPEL LANT IN THE RETURN FILED BY HIM, ON WHIC H TA XES HAV E ALSO BEEN PAID. 8.2.2. THE APPELLANTS' SUBMISS ION CAN BE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER; (I) SHRI ANWARBHAI LAKHANI IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ON 27 - 02 - 1999 HAS STATED THAT RS. 20,00,000 / - IS YET TO BE GIVEN. (II) SHRI BACHU BHAI LAKHANI, THAT IS THE DECEASED APPELLANT, WHEN EXAMINED DURING THE COURSE OF SEA RCH ON 27 - 02 - 1999 STATED THAT HE DID NOT REMEMBER EXACT AMOUNT OF CAPITAL CONTRIBUTED BY HIM IN M/S. R H PATEL & CO. AND I.T. (SS) A NO. 463 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. BLOCK PERIOD PAGE NO DCIT VS. SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI 5 WAS ALSO NOT ABLE TO GIVE ANY EXPLANATION REG ARDING CERTAIN BOOKS FOUND AS PER ANNEXURE - B, AT THE PREMISES SEARCHED, AND STATED THAT HE WOULD SUBMIT THE SAME IN THE OFFICE OF THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER / ADIT. (III) SHRI ANWARBHAI LAKHANI DURING HIS EXAMINATION ON O ATH ON 23 - 03 - 1999, STATED THAT RS . 45,00,00 0/ - WAS PAID BY WAY OF CASH PAYMENT OF RS. 25,00,000/ - AND VALUE OF SHOPS AT RS. 20,00,000/ - , AND NO OTHER AMOUNT REMAINED TO BE PAID. IN REP LY TO A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER RS. 20,00,000/ - ,' WHICH HAD TO BE PAID BY THE APPELLANT, UP TO DECEMBER 1 997 TO SHRI KISH ORBHAI NAIK, WAS FOR TRANSACTION OF PETROL PUMP, SHRI ANWARBHAI LAKHANI REPLIED THAT RS. 20,00,000/ - HAD TO BE BROUGHT BY THE APPELLANT, AS 'WORKING CAPITAL UP TO DECEMBER 1997 AND THE SAME WAS NOT TO BE PAID FOR TRANSACTION OF PETROL PUMP. FURTHER, IN REPLY TO A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER HE WAS IN T HE KNOWLEDGE OF TRANSACTION OF RS. 65,00,000/ - , SHRI ANWARBHAI LAKHANI IN HIS STATEMENT DATED 27 - 02 - 1997, SAID THAT H E DID NOT HAVE ANY SUCH PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE. 8.2.3. SHRI KISHOR NAIK IN HIS STATE MENT RECORDED ON 23 - 03 - 1997, IN REPLY TO A QUESTION THAT REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 20,00,000/ - , AS DECI DED BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES HAD TO BE PAID IN DECEMBER 1997 STATED THAT HE HAS NOT SOLD THE PETROL PUMP,, BUT ONLY LAND SURROUNDING THE P ETROL PUMPS AND HAS ALSO EXECUTED DOCUMENTS FOR THE SAME AND, FOR REDUCING HIS SHARE IN THE PETR OL PUMP TO 33%, HE RECEIVED RS. 45,00,000 / - AND NOT RS. 65,00,000/ - , AND IN HIS V IEW THERE IS A SLIP IN STATING THE FIGURE OF RS. 65,00,000 / - AND IN FACT RS 45,00,000/ - ONLY WAS FIXED FOR PARTING HIS SHARE OF 67% IN THE PETROL P UMP. 8.2.4. PAGE NO. 6 TO 8 OF AN NEXURE - B3, WHEREIN ENTRIES OF RS. 31,53,217/ - ARE RECORDED SHOW THAT CERTA IN PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MARKED AS TOWARD 'DIESEL'. NO EV IDENCE HAS BEEN FOUND THAT ANY AMOUNT IN EXCESS OF RS. 45,00,000 / - WAS PAID IN CASH TO M/S. R. H. PATEL & CO. OR TO SHRI KISHORBHAI NAIK. 8.2.5. IN THE CASE OF R.H. PATEL &' CO. AND SHRI KISHORBHAI NAIK ADDIT ION OF RS. 20,000,000/ - MADE ON THE SAID ACCOUNT HAS BEEN DELETED. 8.3.1 UPON ' CONSIDERA TION THE ABOVE FACTS, I FIND THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ON 27 - 02 - 1999, ALTHOUGH IT WAS ADMITTED THAT TH E DEAL MADE BY THE APPELLANT FOR TAKING OVER 6 7% SHARE IN THE FIRM M/S. R H. PATEL & CO. WAS FOR RS. 65,00,000/ - , OUT OF WHICH, RS. 20,00,000/ - WAS STATED TO BE PAYABLE BY DECEMBER 1997, HOWEVER, THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE ABOVE CONTENTION ON THE GROUND THAT PAGE NO. 6 TO 8 OF SEIZED DOCUMENT ANNEXURE - B3, RECORD ENTRIES OF RS. 31,53,2.17/ - , AND, I.T. (SS) A NO. 463 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. BLOCK PERIOD PAGE NO DCIT VS. SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI 6 HAS HELD THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS TOWARDS TAKING OVER 67% SHARE IN TH E ABOVE FIRM AND THE AMOUNT OF RS. 31, 53, 217/ - INCLUDED CASH PAYMENT OF RS. 25,00,000/ - MADE IN INSTALLMENT OF RS. 5,00,000/ - EACH AND THE BALANCE - AMOUNT OF RS. 6 , 53,217/ - WAS PAYMENT MADE T OWARDS THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 20,00,000/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF THE SAID DOCUMENT FURTHER HELD THAT THE ENT IRE AMOUN T OF 20,00,000/ - WHICH WAS STATED TO BE PAYABLE, HAD ACTUALLY BEEN PAID IN CASH BEFORE THE DATE OF SEARCH, AND ADDED THE SAME AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 8.3. 2. I, THEREFORE, FIND THAT EVEN IF THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT OUT OF T HE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 20,00,000/ - STATED TO BE P AYABLE, EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT OF RS.6,53,217/ - HAS BEEN FOUND IN THE FORM OF ENT RIES IN PAGES 6 TO 8 OF SEIZED DOCUMENT ANNEXUIRE - B3, IS TAKEN AS CORRECT AND VALID, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF MAKING ADD ITION OF RS. 13,46.783/ - (RS. 20,00,000 RS. 6,53,217), WHICH HAS BEEN MADE WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENTARY PROOF. THERE IS ALSO NO EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF STATEMENT RECORDED OF PARTNER OF THE ABOV E FIRM OR THE DECEASED APPELLANT OR HIS LEGAL HEIR THAT AMOUNT O F RS. 20,00,000/ - HAD BEEN PAID BY HIM. 8.3.3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CO NSIDERED THE ENTIRE ENTRIES OF RS. 31,53,217/ - IN PAGES 6 TO 8 OF SEIZED DOCUMENT ANNEXURE - B3, AS PAYMENT MADE BY THE APPELLANT TOWARDS TAKING OVER 67% SHARE IN THE FIRM M/S.. R H PATEL & CO, WHEREAS, THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL HAS IN THE ORDER, RECORDED THAT ANN EXURE - B3 CON TAINED THE HEADING R H PATEL & CO. AND VARIOUS OTHER CONCERNS AND FURTHER THAT SOME OF THE ENTRIES IN THE ABOVE PAGES WAS BY WAY OF CHEQUES AND WERE FOUND TO BE REFL ECTED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF M/S. R H PATEL & CO. THERE FORE, IF OUT OF THE ENTRIES OF RS. 31,53,217/~ IN THE ABOVE PAGES OF A NN EXUTE - B3 ARE TAKEN TO CONTAIN RS. 25, 00,000/ - OF CASH P AYMENT MADE IN INSTALLMENT OF RS. 5,00,000/ - EACH AND RS. 6,53,217/ - TOWARDS P AY MENT OF REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 20,00,000 / - IN CASH, IT MEANS THE ENTRIES OF RS. 31,53,217/ - DO NOT INCLUDE ANY CHEQUE ENTRY REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF R H PATEL & CO., WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE ABOVE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL. 8.3.4. THE ASSES SING OFFICER HAS ALSO DISREGARDED THE FACT THAT ENTRIES OF THE ABOVE AMOUNT OF RS. 31,53, 217/ - ALSO CONTAINED AMOUNT REPRESENTING SALE OF PETROL & DIESEL MADE BY R H PATEL & CO. OF WHICH CERTAIN ENTRIES TALLIED WITH THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE BA L ANCE W ERE DISCLOSED BY M/S. R H PATEL & CO. I.T. (SS) A NO. 463 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. BLOCK PERIOD PAGE NO DCIT VS. SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI 7 8.3.5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, 1 DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICAT ION FOR MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 20,00,000 / - , AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAID AMOUNT, WHICH HAD BEEN STAT ED TO BE PAYABLE ON THE DATE, OF SEARCH, HAS ALSO BEEN PAID IN CASH PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. THE ABOVE ADDITION HAS THUS BEEN MADE WITHOUT ANY D OCUMENTARY OR ORAL EVIDENCE. I, THEREFORE, DELETE THE SAME. IN RESPECT OF THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 6, 21 ,710/ - BEING PART OF THE TOTAL UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE 'APPELLANT DETERMINED AT RS. 26,21,710/ - IS CONCERNED, I FIND THAT THE SAID AMOUNT HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND THE SAME IS ALSO NOT PART OF TH E DIRECTION I SSUED BY THE ITAT, AND IT HAS BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ONLY FOR COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. THE GROUND OF APPEAL TAKE N BY THE APPELLANT IS THUS PAR TLY ALLOWED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE REVENUE AND GONE THROUGH THE CASE FILE. ITS SOLE ENDEAVO R IS TO GET RESTORED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS. 20 LACS BY WAY OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT UNEARTHED IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH. IT HAS COME ON RECORD THAT BALANCE SUM OF RS. 45 LACS ALREADY STOOD DECLARED IN THE RETURN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIM SELF OBSERV ES THAT THIS REMAINING SUM OF RS. 20 LACS WAS YET TO BE PAID AFTER THE SEARCH IN QUESTION. MEANING THEREBY THE REVENUE FAILS TO LEAD ANY EVIDENCE MUCH LESS A COGENT ONE TO PROVE ACTUAL PAYMENT OF RS. 20 LACS IN QUESTION . WE UPHOLD THE CIT(A) S IN THESE P ECULIAR FACTS AND REJECTS THE REVENUE S ARGUMENTS ACCORDINGLY. 7. THIS REVENUE S APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 20 - 08 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( G.D. AGRAWAL ) ( S. S. GODARA ) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 20 /08 /2015 AK I.T. (SS) A NO. 463 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. BLOCK PERIOD PAGE NO DCIT VS. SHRI ANWARBHAI H. LAKHANI 8 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,