The ACIT, 3(1), Bhopal V. Smt. Manorama Agrawal, Bhopal

ITSSA 63/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1372 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 06-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 06-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV VARSHANEY
• Assessee Lawyers: L N MALIK; MANISH MALIK CAS
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained investment; Source of fund; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Valuation report; Assessment record
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 153A; 68; 69; 139

Judgement Text

1 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. 62 TO 65/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 97/IND/2014 A.YS : 2004-05, 2005-06, 2008-09, 2009-10 AND 2010-11 ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1), MRS.MANORAMA AGRAWAL, 188, PUL BOGDA, BHOPAL VS JINSI, JAHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. ADQPA4360C I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 39 & 40/IND/2014 & I.T.A.NO. 90/IND/2014 A.YS : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 MRS. MANORAMA AGRAWAL, ACIT, 188,PUL BOGDA, VS CIRCLE 3(1), JINSI, JAHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL BHOPAL APPELLANT RESPONDENT MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 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 EIGHT APPEALS FIVE APPEALS BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THREE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE, RELATE TO ASSESS MENT YEARS 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2008-09 TO 2010-11. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER. 2. 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. THE ASSESSEE IS THE WIFE OF SHRI KAILASH CH AND AGARWAL AND MOTHER OF SHRI SUNIL AGARWAL WHO ARE CARRYING O UT BUSINESS IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S. G.S. OIL MILLS AND M/ S. G. S. DATE OF HEARING : 06.10.2015. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 .1 2 .2015 MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 3 3 ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PV T. LIMITED SITUATED AT THE SAME PREMISES. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICES ISSUED U/S 153A ON 28.04.2011, RETURNS HAVE BEEN FILED ON 07.07.2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2009-10 WHEREAS RETURN FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 HAS BEEN FILED ON 16.04.2010. THE ASSESSEE IS STATED TO HAVE NOT FILED RETURNS FOR ANY OF THESE YEARS IN DUE COURSE DURING PRE-SEARCH PERIOD, THERE BEING NO TAXABLE INCOME. THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES IN HER RETURNS A S UNDER WHICH HAS BEEN ASSESSED BY THE A.O. AT INCOMES AS P ER THE FOLLOWING CHART : S.NO. A.Y. RETURNED INCOME (U/S 153A) (RS.) ASSESSED INCOME (RS) 1 2004-05 43,720 20,17,427 2 2005-06 61,200 3,61,200 3 2006-07 68,979 68,979* 4 2007-08 74,330 3,74,330 5 2008-09 1,02,640 6,02,640 6 2009-10 2,50,000 19,28,230 7 2010-11 2,49,430 50,10,410 *NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 2006-07. 3. THE COMMON GROUND TAKEN IN DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 4 4 RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS. 36,59,230/ - MADE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06, 2008-09, 2009-10 AND 2010-11 ON ACC OUNT OF BANK DEPOSIT TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED. WHILE MAKING S UCH ADDITION, THE AO HAS MENTIONED AS UNDER :- THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE ISSUED U/S 142(1) DATED 31.10.2011 TO PROVIDE DETAILS OF A LL BANK ACCOUNTS HELD IN HER NAME (INCLUDING JOINT ACCOUNT) AND ALSO TO PROVIDE DETAILED FUND FLOW STATEMENTS REFLECTING ALL CREDITS AND WITHDRAWALS O F ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ASKED TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE VARIOUS ACCOUNTS NOT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY RETURNS U/ S 139(1) AND THUS IS HAVING NO SOURCE OF INCOME. THE SCRUTINY OF PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK , MARWARI ROAD,BHOPAL A/C NO. 0054000100103699 REVEALS THE FOLLOWING CREDITS OVER A PERIOD 2004-05 TO 2007-08. MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 5 5 P.Y. 2004 - 05 A.Y. 2005 - 06 DATE AMOUNT 31.08.2004 3,00,000 TOTAL RS. 3,00,000 P. Y. 2007-08 A.Y. 2008-09 DATE AMOUNT 02.11.2007 1,00,000 21.11.2007 1,00,000 12.02.2008 1,00,000 14.02.2008 2,00,000 TOTAL RS. 5,00,000 ALSO IN ONE OF THE REPLY THE ASSESSEE HAS AGREED TO HAVE AN ACCOUNT IN STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD, THE TRANSACTION DETAILS OF WHICH IN THE FORM OF FUND FL OW WERE NOT PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE SCRUTINY OF STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD A/C NO. 5201134592 REVEALS THE FOLLOWING CREDITS OVER A PER IOD 2004-05 TO 2007-08. P. Y. 2008-2009 A.Y. 2009-10 MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 6 6 DATE AMOUNT 16.05.1008 10,00,000 28.05.2008 5,00,000 31.05.2008 26,910 SEPTEMBER 2008 71,910 DECEMBER, 2008 52,500 JANUARY 2009 26,910 TOTAL RS. 16,78,230 P.Y. 2009-2010 A.Y. 2010-11 DATE AMOUNT APRIL 2009 3,60,000 MAY 2009 5,01,000 JULY 2009 2,00,000 AUGUST 2009 60,000 DECEMBER 2009 60,000 TOTAL RS. 11,81,000 ALSO IT IS FOUND THAT ASSESSEE IS HAVING VARIOUS C ASH/CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS FOR WHICH NO EXPLANATION IS PROVI DED FOR THE SOURCE THEREOF, THE SAID CASH/CREDITS ARE BEING ADD ED FOR IN THE RESPECTIVE YEAR AS PER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 68. ASSESSMENT YEAR AMOUNT 2005-06 5,00,000 2008-09 5,00,000 2009-10 16,78,230 2010-11 11,81,000 TOTAL RS. 36,59,230 4. THE MATTER CARRIED TO LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CI T(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 7 7 4.2 APPELLANTS SUBMISSIONS ALONG WITH ASSESSMENT O RDER AND RECORDS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED CAREFULLY. A.O. HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.3.00.000/- &. RS.5,00,000/- FOR A Y 2005-06 & 2008-09 FOR CASH DEPOSITS APPEARING IN APPELLANT'S PNB. MUMBAI RD. BHOPAL BEARING A/C NO. 0054000100103699. SIMILAR ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE FO R RS.16,78,230/- & RS. 11,81,000/- FOR A. Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11 RESPECTIVELY IN RESPECT OF DEPOSITS MADE IN STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD A/C NO. 52021134592. AS PER THE A .0., THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO GIVE ANY EXPLANATION IN RESPECT OF THESE DEPOSITS, HENCE TREATED AS UNEXPLA INED AND ADDITION MADE U/S 68. HOWEVER, FROM PERUSAL OF ASSESSMENT RECORDS IT IS SEEN THAT IN RESPONSE FIRST DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE ISSUED BY THE AO ON 31.10.20 11 FIXING APPELLANT'S CASE FOR 4.11.2011, THE APPELLAN T HAS, VIDE LETTER DATED 04.11.2011 INFORMED THE AO THAT O UT OF LIST OF 19 BANK ACCOUNTS, IN RESPECT OF WHICH EXPLANATIO N SOUGHT BY THE A.O. ONLY TWO PERTAIN TO HER AND COPIES OF BANK ACCOUNTS STATEMENT NARRATING EXPLANATION OF DEBITS AND CREDITS MADE THEREIN HAS BEEN GIVEN BEFORE THE A.O. ALONG MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 8 8 WITH OTHER DETAILS REGARDING JEWELLERY, SOURCES OF INCOME, SHAREHOLDING IN M/S. G S.ROLLER FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD., ETC. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO STATED THAT NO SEPARATE PERS ONAL BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BEING MAINTAINED BY HER. AGAIN, V IDE LETTER DTD.19.12.2011, NATURE OF TRANSACTIONS IN BA NK ACCOUNT'S ALONGWITH SEPARATE EXPLANATION FOR AMOUNT S IN RESPECT OF KOTAK SECURITIES BEEN GIVEN. VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DTD.23.12.2011 THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN ASKED T O SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS IN HE R BANK ACCOUNTS ALONG WITH OTHER INVESTMENTS BE NOT T REATED AS UNEXPLAINED. IN RESPONSE, THE APPELLANT HAS AGAIN GIVEN DETAILED NARRATION FOR EACH DEPOSIT AND WITHD RAWAL IN THESE TWO BANK ACCOUNTS VIDE HER LETTER DT.26.12.20 011 AND HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF EXPLANATION GIVEN , THE QUESTION OF TREATING THEM AS UNEXPLAINED DOES NOT A RISE AT ALL. APPELLANT'S AR-SH.R.C.BAHETI HAS ALSO APPEARED ON 26.12.2011. VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DTD. 26.12.2011. ABOVE MENTIONED SUBMISSION MADE HAS BEEN FOUND RECORDED A ND CASE DISCUSSED WITH AR. NO ADVERSE REMARKS ARE FOUN D MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 9 9 MADE IN THE RECORDS ON FILING OF SUCH SUBMISSIONS N OR ANY ENQUIRY MADE THEREAFTER BEFORE PASSING OF ASSESSMEN T ORDER ON 30.12.2011. THUS, AO'S OBSERVATIONS THAT T HE APPELLANT HAS NOT GIVEN ANY EXPLANATION FOR THESE C ASH DEPOSITS IS NOT BORNE OUT FROM RECORDS. FURTHER, TH E APPELLANT HAS CATEGORICALLY INFORMED THAT SHE DOES NOT MAINTAIN ANY PERSONAL ACCOUNTS, HENCE TOTAL AMOUNT TREATED UNEXPLAINED SOLELY IN ABSENCE OF FUNDS/CASH FLOW STATEMENT IS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE. 4.3 AFTER PERUSAL OF RECORDS. APPELLANT'S SUBMISSI ONS REGARDING DEPOSITS IN HER PNB BANK ACCOUNT FOR RS.3.00.000/- (31.08.2004 A.Y. 2005-06) AND RS. 1,00,000/- EACH (02.11.2007 & 21.11.2007, A.Y. 2008 -09) ARE FOUND ACCEPTABLE. THESE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN RECE IVED THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES AND NOT CASH. ONE FRO M M/S. G. S. OIL MILLS ( RS. 3,00,000 ON 31.08.2004) AND AS SHOWN IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND OTHERS FROM M/S. KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. THE APPELLANT'S SUBMISSIONS REGARDI NG INVESTMENT IN M/S. G.S.OIL MILLS HAVE NOT BEEN FOUN D MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 10 10 ACCEPTABLE IN PRECEDING PARAS OF THIS ORDER AND ADD ITION FOR TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 13,80,707/- HAS ALREADY BE EN MADE IN HANDS OF M/S. G. S. OIL MILLS. HOWEVER, THI S DOES NOT NEGATE THE FACT THAT AMOUNT DEPOSITED THROUGH C HEQUE IN APPELLANTS BANK ACCOUNT IS FOUND EXPLAINABLE. S IMILARLY IS THE CASE FOR TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,000/- DEPOS ITED DURING A.Y. 2008-09 ON 02.11.2007 AND 21.11.2007 WH ICH ARE NOT FOUND TO BE CASH DEPOSITS BUT AMOUNTS RECEI VED THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES FROM KOTAK SECURITIES . THEREFORE, ADDITION FOR THESE AMOUNTS TOTALING RS. 5,00,000/- PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2005-06 ( RS. 3,00,000 /-) & A.Y. 2008-09 ( RS. 2,00,000/-) IS NOT FOUND SUSTAIN ABLE AND HEREBY DELETED. HOWEVER, THE APPELLANTS EXPLAN ATION REGARDING BALANCE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 1,00,000/- & RS. 2,00,000/- (12.02.2008 & 14.02.2008) IN THE SAID PN B ACCOUNT ARE NOT FOUND SATISFACTORY AND ADDITION MAD E OF RS.3,00,000/- IN PNB A/C. FOR A Y 2008-09 IS, HEREBY CONFIRMED. 4.4 AS REGARDS VARIOUS DEPOSITS MADE IN STATE BANK OF MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 11 11 HYDERABAD A/C. APPELLANT'S CONTENTION ARE FOUND ACCEPTABLE IN RESPECT OF DEPOSITS OF RS. 10,00,000/- (16.05.2008), RS.5,00,000/- (28.05.2008) RS.3,00,000/- (02.04.2009) AND RS.2,00,000/- (13.07,2009) MADE THROUGH CHEQUES WITHDRAWALS FROM M/S. G.S.OIL MILLS AS PER ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHERE SHE HAS STATED TO B E HAVING AN OLD ACCOUNT. THE AMOUNT APPEARING IN SAID ACCOUNT HAS ALREADY BEEN ADDED IN THE HANDS OF M/S. G.S.OIL MILLS ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED CREDITWORTHINESS TO MAKE INVESTMENT/LEND THIS AMOUNT. ALSO A.O. HAS NOT DRAW N ANY ADVERSE INFERENCE IN CASE OF M/S. G.S.OIL MILLS REGARDING SUCH AMOUNTS AND THEIR WITHDRAWAL BY THE APPELLANT AS PER ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. ACCORDINGLY , ADDITION OF RS.20,00.000/- IS NOT FOUND SUSTAINABLE AND DELETED. HOWEVER, REGARDING BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.8,59,230/- PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2009-10(RS. 1,78,230/-) AND A. Y. 2010-11 (RS.6.81.000/-), THE APPELLANT HAS MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE THEIR SOURCES WITH THE HELP OF ANY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. THE CLAIM OF MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 12 12 EARNING OF INTEREST INCOME AS SHOWN IN HER RETURNS TO PROVE ITS SOURCE IS ALSO NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE ON THE GROUND THAT NO REGULAR RETURN IN DUE COURSE BEEN FILED AND THESE RETURNS DECLARING ALLEGED INTEREST INCOME HAVE BEEN FILED AFTER SEARCH OPERATIONS ONLY TO JUSTIFY THESE UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN HER HANK ACCOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, ADDITION OF RS. 1,78,230/-( A. Y 2009-10) & RS.6,81,000/ (A Y 2010-11 ) IS HEREBY CONFIRMED ALONGWITH RS. 3,00,000/- (A. Y 2005-06) & RS.3,00,000/- (A. Y.2008-09) AS MENTIONED EARLIER.' 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS ADDED THE AMOUNT OF R S. 3 LACS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSIT F OUND OF RS. 3 LACS IN BANK ACCOUNT OF PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, MAR WARI ROAD, BHOPAL, A/C NO. 0054000100103699. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CREDIT ENTRIES WERE APPEARING IN M/S. G. S. OIL. MILLS FROM WHERE SHE HAS DEPOSITED THIS AMOUNT FROM M/S. G. S. OIL MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 13 13 MILLS OUT OF HER CREDIT BALANCE FROM M/S. G. S. OIL MILL. MOREOVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THE TRANSACTION RECORDE D IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M/S. G. S. OIL MILL. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS VERIFIED THE SAME AND AFTER VERIFICATION, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THIS AMOUNT. IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IN ASSESSEES AC COUNT RS. 5 LACS WERE APPEARING IN BANK ACCOUNT IN PUNJAB NATIONAL B ANK ACCOUNT NO. 103699. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT CREDIT ENTR IES AS AMOUNT FROM RECEIPT FROM KOTAK SECURITIES LIMITED AND THE AMOUNT WAS WITHDRAWN AS CASH ENTRIES DEPOSIT AGAIN IN CASH. TH E ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE PAPER BOOK BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ALON GWITH BANK STATEMENT AND AFTER VERIFYING THE SAME, THE LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION. IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, TH E AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 16,78,230/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXP LAINED CREDIT IN THE STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBM ITTED THAT THIS AMOUNT IS WITHDRAWN FROM M/S. G. S. OIL MILL THROUG H ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE AND REST OF THE INCOME IS INTEREST INCOME. S IMILARLY, IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF RS. 3 LACS FROM M/S. G. S. OIL MILLS, RS. 5 LACS FR OM HUNDI LOAN RECEIVED BY CHEQUE, RS. 2 LACS FROM M/S. G.S.OIL MI LLS, RS. 60,000/- AS INTEREST INCOME AND AGAIN RS. 60,000/- INTEREST INCOME. THE LD. MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 14 14 CIT(A) HAS VERIFIED ALL THESE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND AFTER VERIFYING THE SAME, HE HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT O F THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. THEREFORE, OUR INTERFERENCE IS NOT REQUIRED. CONSEQUENTLY, COMMON GROUNDS TAKEN FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06, 2008-09, 2009-10 AND 2010-11 ARE DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS FOR ASSESSM ENT YEARS 2005-06, 2008-09, 2009-10 AND 2010-11 ARE DISMISSED ON THE ABOVE COMMON GROUNDS. 7. IN THE RESULT, I.T.(SS) A.NOS. 63, 64, 65 & 97/IND/ 2014 ARE DISMISSED. 8. IN DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL I.T.(SS) A.NOS. 62/IND/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, THE FOLLOWING GROUND H AS BEEN TAKEN :- THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING TH E ADDITION OF RS. 19,73,707/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. 9. THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE DETAILS OF INVE STMENTS MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 15 15 MADE BY HER IN VARIOUS FIRMS/COMPANIES RELATING TO FAMILY GROUP OR ELSEWHERE. THE ASSESSEE DENIED OF H AVING ANY SUCH INVESTMENTS SUPPORTING TO WHICH CLAIM WAS MADE THAT SINCE NO REGULAR RETURNS ARE BEING FILED HENCE THERE IS NO QUESTION OF INVESTING MONEY SOMEWHERE. ON REVEALING THE FINAL ACCOUNTS OF M/S. G. S. OIL MILL S AND M/S. G. S. ROLLER MILLS PVT. LTD. IT WAS FOUND THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 A SUM OF RS. 13,80,707/- AN D RS. 5,93,000/- WAS APPEARING AS UNSECURED LOANS TAK EN FROM THE ASSESSEE RESPECTIVELY. AS PER PROVISION OF SECTION 69 THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECORDED THE SAME IN THE BO OKS OF ACCOUNTS AND ALSO HAS NOT OFFERED ANY EXPLANATION A BOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENT. ACCORDINGL Y, THE AMOUNT OF RS. 13,80,707/- AND RS. 5,93,000/- ARE BE ING ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE FINANCI AL YEAR 2004-05. ASSESSMENT YEAR AMOUNT 2004-05 RS. 19,73,707 MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 16 16 TOTAL RS. RS.19,73,707 10. THE MATTER CARRIED TO LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER : 3.2 APPELLANT'S SUBMISSIONS ALONG WITH ASSESSMENT ORDER HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED CAREFULLY. ASSESSMENT RECORDS HAVE ALSO BEEN PERUSED. IT IS SEEN FROM ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD 30.12.2011 PASSED U/S 153A RWS 143(3) FOR A.YS. 2004-05 TO 2010-11 OF' M/ S G.S. OIL MILLS THAT THE SAME A.O. HAS ADDED AMOUNT OF RS. 13,80,707/- FOR A.Y. 2004-05 SHOWN AS UNSECURED LOAN FROM THE APPELLANT IN THE HANDS OF G.S. OIL MILLS ON THE GROUND THAT CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE LENDER I.E. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT BEEN PROVED. SIMILAR ADDITION OF RS. 5,93,000/-(TAKEN INADVERTENTLY AS RS.5.30.000/-BY T HE A.O. WHILE COMPUTING TOTAL INCOME) HAS BEEN MADE FO R A.Y. 2004-05 IN CASE OF M/S. G.S.ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD. ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM THE APPELLAN T SHOWN IN ITS BOOKS. FURTHER, IN THE APPEAL ORDER DATED MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 17 17 09.10.2013 PASSED BY THE UNDERSIGNED IN CASE OF M/S. G. S. ROLLER FLOUR MILL PVT. LTD. IN APPEAL NO. 367 TO 373/2011-12, THIS ADDITION OF RS. 5,93,000/- HAS BE EN CONFIRMED AS UNDER :- 6.2 APPELLANTS SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED CAREFULLY ALONGWITH ASSESSMENT ORDER AND RECORDS. AO HAS MADE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 5,30,000/- MAINLY ON THE GROUND THAT CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE LENDER VIZ. SMT. MANORAMA BAI ONE OF THE PERSONS/ASSESSEES COVERED UNDER SEARCH PROCEEDINGS HAS NOT BEEN PROVED BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO FAILED TO SATISFACTORILY EXPLAIN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 5,93,000/- (TAKEN INADVERTENTLY AS RS. 5,30,000/- BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SINCE IN CASE OF SMT. MANORAMA BA I SAME AO HAS MADE SIMILAR ADDITION FOR SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR U/S 69 AT RS. 5,93,000/-) APPEARING IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS HAVING RECEIVED FROM SM T. MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 18 18 MANORAMABAI EXCEPT SUBMITTING THAT IT IS AN OLD BALANCE. NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT BOTH AT ASSESSMENT OR APPEAL STAGE EXPL AINING ALL THE THREE CRITERIA/CONDITIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961. AT THE MOST, ONLY IDENTITY OF THE LE NDER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED WHICH IS, IN ANY CASE, NOT IN DOUB T AS SHE HAS ALSO BEEN COVERED UNDER SEARCH. NO REGULAR RETU RNS FOR PRE SEARCH PERIOD HAVE BEEN FILED BY HER IN DUE COU RSE. IN FACT, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATIONS ALSO, SHE HAS DENIED OF HAVING MADE ANY INVESTMENT ANYWHERE. THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED MISERABLY TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE LENDER ALONGWITH GENUINENES S OF THE ALLEGED LOAN TRANSACTION. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THAT IT IS THE APPELLANT AND THE APPELLANT ALONE AND THE ONUS IS O N IT, TO FURNISH ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF ITS ACCOUNTS. MERE FILING OF PAN/GIR NO. OF CREDITORS IS NOT SUFFICIENT NOR THE FACT THAT AMOUNT HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE MAKES IT SACROSANCT. THE LENDER IS APPELLANT'S WITNESS IN MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 19 19 RESPECT OF LOAN ACCOUNT APPEARING IN ITS HOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND IT IS ITS DUTY TO EXPLAIN THE SAME WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. THE MERE FACT THAT NO TRANSACT ION HAS TAKEN PLACE IN THE SAID LOAN ACCOUNT DURING THE YEAR AND IN FACT TILL 2010-11 AND PURPORTING IT TO BE AN OLD BALANCE DOES NOT ABSOLVE THE APPELLANT OF ITS D UTY TO EXPLAIN IT SATISFACTORILY. SINCE THE APPELLANT H AS FAILED TO DO SO, ADDITION OF RS. 5,93,000/- (INADVERTENTLY MADE BY THE A.O. AS RS. 5,30,000/-) IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS, ACCORDINGLY. DISMISSED. A.O. IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COMPUTE APPELLANTS INCOME ACCORDINGLY WHILE GIVIN G EFFECT TO THIS APPEAL ORDER. SIMILARLY FOR INVESTMENT IN M/S G.S. OIL MILLS, THE ONLY EVIDENCE GIVEN IS COPY OF ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT IN THE BOOKS OF M/S G.S OIL MILLS FROM 2004-05 TO 2010-11 SHOWING OPENING AND CLOSING BALANCE OF RS. 13,80,7 07/- (AS ON 01.04.2003) AND RS. 1,19,292/- (AS ON 31.03. 2010) RESPECTIVELY. AS PER THE APPELLANT, SHE HAS BEEN MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 20 20 MAINTAINING ACCOUNTS WITH M/S. G. S. OIL MILLS AND M/S. G. S. ROLLER FLOUR MILLS (P) LIMITED SINCE 1989-90. HOWEV ER, DURING THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, SHE HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED VIDE LETTER DTD 23.10.2013 OF NO T FILING ANY INCOME TAX RETURN FROM A.Y. 1989-90 TO 2003-04 AS HER INCOME WAS BELOW TAXABLE LIMIT. SIMILARLY, NO RETURN HAS BEEN FILED FOR ANY OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IN DUE COURSE. EVEN IN THE RETURNS FILED U/S 153A NOMINAL I NCOME HAS BEEN DECLARED FROM OTHER SOURCES WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS/EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT THEREOF. EVEN IN HER STA TEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATIONS, SH E HAS CATEGORICALLY DENIED OF HAVING MADE ANY INVESTMENT IN BUSINESS PROPERTIES, RELATED FIRMS AND GOVT. SECURI TIES ETC. APPELLANTS CONTENTION REGARDING AND RELIANCE ON ASSESSMENT ORDERS, PASSED EARLIER U/S 143(3) IN CASE OF M/S. G. S. ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT.LTD., IT HAS BEEN BY E LABORATELY DISCUSSED (PG.NO.2 TO 15) THAT THAT AO IS AUTHORIZED TO ASSESS TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT U/S 153A OR 153 C OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. INDEPENDENT OF ANY EARLIER MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 21 21 PROCEEDINGS IN VIEW OF MATERIAL ON RECORD GATHERED DURING SEARCH PROCEEDINGS AND POST SEARCH ENQUIRIES MADE. IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW, THE APPELLANT HAS MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE HER CREDITWORTHINESS FOR HAVING ADVANCED LOAN OF RS . 13,80,707/- TO M/S. G. S. OIL MILLS AND AS HELD IN THE CASE OF M/S. G. S. ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT.LTD. MENTIONED AB OVE. ON SIMILAR FACTS. ACCORDINGLY ADDITION OF RS. 13,80.70 7/- AND RS. 5,93,000/- F OR UNSECURED LOANS TO M/S. G. S. OIL MILLS AND M/S G.S. ROLLER FLOUR MILLS RESPECTIVELY MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT IS NOT FOUND SUSTAINABLE SIN CE SIMILAR ADDITION MADE IN THE HANDS OF M/S. G. S. ROLLER FLOU R MILLS PVT.LTD. AND M/S. G. S. ROLLER OIL MILLS AND AS CONFIRM ED PROVE THAT SAID AMOUNTS BELONG TO THESE FAMILY BUSI NESS CONCERNS ONLY AND NOT THE APPELLANT. 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 AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 13,80,707/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 AS UNSECURED LOAN FROM ASSE SSEES HANDS OF G. S. OIL MILLS ON THE GROUND THAT THE CRE DITWORTHINESS MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 22 22 OF THE LENDER HAS NOT BEEN. SIMILARLY, AN ADDITION OF RS. 5,93,000/- HAS BEEN MADE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM THE ASSESSEE SHOWN I N ITS BOOKS. WE FIND THAT LD.CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE AD DITION OF RS. 5,93,000/- IN THE HANDS OF G. S. ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED AND THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IS CONFIRMED BY US. SIMILARLY, INVESTMENT IN M/S. G. S. OIL MILLS, THE ONLY EVIDEN CE GIVEN WAS COPY OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF M/S . G. S. OIL MILLS FROM LAY 2004-05 TO 2010-11 SHOWING OPENING A ND CLOSING BALANCE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED ALL THESE EV IDENCE AND DELETED THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF MANORAMA AGRAW AL. THEREFORE, OUR INTERFERENCE IS NOT REQUIRED. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IN I.T.(SS).A.NO.62/IND/2014 IS DISMISSED. 13. IN ASSESSEES APPEAL IN I.T.(SS) A.NO. 39/IND/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, THE ONLY GROUND RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS. 3 LACS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH C REDIT. 14. THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION AS PER THE OBSERVATION S ALREADY REPRODUCED ABOVE IN PARA 3. MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 23 23 15. THE MATTER CARRIED TO LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 1,78,230/- FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND RS. 1,81,000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 -11 AND RS. 3 LACS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WAS ALSO CON FIRMED BY THE CIT(A). 16. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT TH E AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 3 LACS WHICH REQUIRES TO BE CONFIRMED. HENCE, WE DISMISS THIS GROUND. GROUND NO. 1 IN I.T.(SS) A.NOS. 39/IND/2014 AND 40/ IND/2014 AND GROUND NO. 2 OF I.T.(SS) A.NO. 90/IND/2014 OF A SSESSEES APPEALS: 17. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER. 18. THE NEXT GROUND OF RS. 36,59,230/- MADE FOR ASSESSM ENT YEARS 2005-06, 2008-09 AND 2010-11 ON ACCOUNT OF BA NK DEPOSIT AND TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED. THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION ON PAGE 6 & 7 OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN REPRODUCED UNDER PARA 3 OF THIS ORDER ABOVE. 19. THE MATTER CARRIED TO LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A ) HAS MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 24 24 CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 3,00,000/ - FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, RS. 1,78,230/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND RS. 6,81,000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AS PER THE OBSERVATIONS ALREADY REPRODUCED ABOVE UNDER PARA 4. 20. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUBMITTED BEF ORE US THAT IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS. 3 LACS IN ASSESS MENT YEAR 2008-09, THE ASSESSEE HAD NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THE CASH WHICH WAS REDEPOSITED AGAIN IN THE BANK AND THE ASS ESSEE HAD NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. THEREFORE, IT MAY BE CONFIR MED. 21. IN RESPECT OF ADDITION MADE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CRE DIT IN STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESE NTATIVE HAS GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE US UNDER RULE 29/30 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES. THE LD. AUTHOR IZED REPRESENTATIVE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IT IS THE COPY O F THE CONFIRMATION LETTER REGARDING EXPENSES OF RS. 5 LAC S BY SHRI RAM SADHWANI, PROPRIETOR OF M/S. POSHAK THROUGH CHE QUE NO. 963763 DRAWN ON STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD. THIS EVIDE NCE COULD NOT BE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO AND HIS CONFIR MATION LETTER IS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, IT MAY BE MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 25 25 ADMITTED AND THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE AO F OR VERIFICATION. 22. IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.1,78,230/- THE LD. AUT HORIZED REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE SUBMISSION MADE ON P AGE 8 OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 16,78,230/ - AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE BANK. THIS ENTRY RELATES TO THE AMOUNT WITHDRAWN FROM G. S. OIL MILLS THROUGH ACCOU NT PAYEE CHEQUES. THE AO HAS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE INCO ME DISCLOSED AS INTEREST INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,78 ,230/- IN THE RETURN FILED U/S 139 OF THE ACT. THE COPY OF TH E INCOME TAX RETURN WAS FILED. THEREFORE, NO ADDITION COULD BE M ADE. 23. THE LD. CIT DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 24. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFO RE US AND THIS EVIDENCE IS CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM ONE SHRI RAM MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 26 26 SADHWANI AND HE HAS GIVEN THE CONFIRMATION THAT HE HAS ACCEPTED RS. 5 LACS FROM SMT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL THRO UGH CHEQUE NO. 963763 DRAWN ON STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD ON 03.05.2008 AND REPAID THE AMOUNT TO HER VIDE CHEQUE NO. 199545 ON 25.05.2009. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS IS AN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH CAN BE VERIFIED BY THE AO . THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, WE ADMIT THE SAME. 25. LOOKING TO THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, WE FIND THAT THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT PRESSED IN RESPEC T OF ADDITION OF RS. 3 LACS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS. 1,78,230/- AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED THIS AS INTEREST INCOME AND COPY OF THE RETURN IS FILED BEFORE THE AO. THEREFORE, IT REQUIR ES VERIFICATION AT THE END OF THE AO. SIMILARLY, THE EXPENSES OF RS . 5 LACS FROM SHRI RAM SADHWANI ALSO REQUIRES VERIFICATION AT THE END OF THE AO. THEREFORE, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE FI LE OF AO AND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY WHETHER THE AMOUNT OF RS. 1,78,230/- IS SHOWN IN THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE OR NOT AND IN RESPECT OF RS. 5 LACS, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE IS FILED. MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 27 27 THERE FORE, IT IS RESTORED TO THE AO TO VERIFY THE SAME A ND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE MATTER AS PER LAW. 26. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IS DISMISSED AND APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEA RS 2009- 10 AND 2010-11 ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO, FOR VERIFICATION. HENCE, THE APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTIC AL PURPOSES. I.T.(SS) A.NO. 90/IND/2014 A.Y. 2010-11 : 27. GROUND NO. 1 WHICH READS AS UNDER :- THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 20,07,880/- MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY AND FAILING TO APPRECIATE THAT JEWELLERY AND SILVER FOUND WAS LESS THAN THE DECLARED BY MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY. 28. THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 20,07,880/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE ISSUED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 28 28 GIVE DETAILS OF GOLD, JEWELLERY AND SILVER POSSESS ED BY HER. THE SAME WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AT RESIDENTIAL PREMISES AND LOCKER. A TOTAL WEIGHT OF 214.1 GMS . OF GOLD AND 3835 GMS. OF SILVER ITEMS VALUING RS. 14,29,579/- WAS FOUND IN THE BEDROOM OF THE ASSESSEE. JEWELLERY WORTH RS. 20,32,010/- WAS FOUND IN LOCKER. FOR GOLD AND SILVER FOUND IN BED ROOM, I T WAS TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT SOME OF THE PORTION OF THE SA ID GOLD AND SILVER BELONGS TO A SSESSEES DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AND GRANDDAUGHTER. ALSO THE SAME HAS BEEN SHOWN IN WEALTH TAX RETURNS. HOWEVER, NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION WAS PROVIDED FOR THE SOURCE OF ACQUISITION OF SAME AND WHY THE GOLD INCLUDING REGULAR JEWELRY WEARINGS OF DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AND GRAND DAUGHTER WAS FOUND IN ASSESSEES ROOM. WITH REGARDS TO JEWELLERY OF RS. 20,32,010/- FOUND IN LOCKER TOO THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT PROVIDED ANY SATISFACTORY DETAILS. HOWEVER, IN ONE OF THE REPLY THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT 1729 GMS. O F GOLD AND JEWELLERY WAS DECLARED IN VDIS BY SMT. RENU AGRAWAL A CERTIFICATE OF WHICH WAS ALSO ENCLOS ED MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 29 29 WITH REPLY. WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE ITEM-WISE DETAILS OF SAID GOLD DECLARED UNDER VDIS NO LINKING WAS PROVIDED ON SAID DECLARATION. ALSO SOURCE OF SUCH DECLARATION ALONG WITH CLAIM THAT THE OLD GOLD ORNAMENTS WERE EXCHANGED AND CONVERTED INTO NEW ONES WAS NOT PROVIDED WITH PROPER BILLS OR EXCHANGE SLIPS NORMALLY PROVIDED BY THE JEWELERS. DESPITE VARIOUS REMINDERS THE ASSE ESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS F OR VERIFICATION. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF 69A SINCE THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT GIVEN ANY SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION ABOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF ACQUISITION OF JEWELLERY, FOUN D AT THE PREMISES AND BANK LOCKER NO. 624. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE IN POSSESSION OF AND AS SUCH T HE OWNER OF GOLD AND JEWELLERY FOUND. ACCORDINGLY, AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF INCOME-TAX ACT, THE VALUE OF SUCH JEWELLERY FOUND IS DEEMED TO BE UNEXPLAINED AND HENCE, ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 14,29,579/- AND RS. MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 30 30 20,32,010/- IS BEING ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 29. THE MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. C IT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 30. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT DU RING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED T HE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF WEALTH TAX RETURN FILED ON 13.2.2 019 ALONGWITH COMPUTATION OF WEALTH FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1989-90 WITH CHALLAN OF PAYMENT OF WEALTH TAX DISCLOSING 10 0 TOLAS OF GOLD ORNAMENTS, 116 GMS. SILVER ORNAMENTS AND UTENS ILS 2 KGS. THE RETURN WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. SIMILARL Y, WEALTH TAX RETURN FOR KASTURI BAI DISCLOSING 80 TOLAS OF G OLD ORNAMENTS AND SILVER ORNAMENTS AND UTENSIL OF 5 KGS. WAS DISC LOSED IN WEALTH TAX RETURN. SIMILARLY, DOCUMENTS REGARDING D ECLARATION OF VDI SCHEME, VALUATION REPORT OF JEWELLERY IS ALS O FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE STATEMENT OF TOTAL WEALTH OF SMT. RENU AGRAWAL SEIZED FROM LPS-2 PAGE 25 WAS ALS O FOUND. ALL THESE DETAILS WERE GIVEN TO CIT(A) AND LD. CIT( A) HAS NOT VERIFIED THE CORRECTNESS OF THIS WEALTH TAX RETURN. MOREOVER, THE MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 31 31 AO HAS ALSO NOT VERIFIED THE SAME. THE LD. AUTHORIZ ED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT IN RESPECT OF GOLD, I T WAS FOUND LESS THAN DECLARED BY ALL THE FAMILY MEMBERS, SINCE THEIR RESPECTIVE WEALTH TAX RETURNS. THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY SEPARATE ADDITION IN THE CASE OF SMT. RENU AGRAWAL AND JEWELLERY DISCLOSED BY SMT. RENU AGRAWAL IN HER INC OME TAX AND WEALTH TAX RETURNS AND UNDER VDIS CERTIFICATES IT CANNOT BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, NO ADDITION IS REQUIRED. 31. THE LD. CIT DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 32. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND FROM THE CIT(A)S ORDER THAT THE CIT(A) HAS HELD TH AT THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE DECLARED THE G OOD AND SILVER ITEMS. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS MENTI ONED IN THE CHART THE ITEMS/JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE O F SEARCH AND ITEMS AND JEWELLERY FOUND AS PER DECLARATION OF WEALTH TAX RETURN, WHICH READS AS UNDER :- MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 32 32 SR.NO. ITEMS/ JEWELLERY FOUND DURING SEARCH ITEMS/ /JEWELLERY DECLARED AS PER W.T. RETURNS GOLD SILVER GOLD SILVER (I) BEDRROM OF MRS.MANORM AGARWAL 214.100 GMS. 38.354 KGS. MRS.KASTURIBAI 880 GMS. 5 KGS. (II) BEDROOM OF MRS. RENU AGARWAL 881.100 GMS. 2.61 KG. MRS.MANORAMA AGARWAL 1107 GMS. 2 KGS. (III) BANK LOCKER NO.624 1398.42 GMS. 2.4 KGS. MR S. RENU AGARWAL 1719.64 GMS. 39.45 KGS. 2493.62 GMS. 43.364 KGS. 3706.64 GMS. 41.45 K GS. 33. AFTER CONSIDERING THESE VDIS CERTIFICATES, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS DISCREPANCY OF 1213.02 GMS. IN RESPECT OF GOLD AND 1.914 KGS. OF SILVER REMAINS TO BE EXPLAIN ED. WE FIND THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE WEALTH TAX RETURN, THEREFORE, RESPECTIVE RETURNS SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AND WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT LD. CIT(A) AND AO HAVE NOT VERIFIED THE WEALTH TAX RETU RN AND JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. WE FOUND THAT WH EN AO HAS NOT CARRIED OUT ANY EXERCISE TO VERIFY, THEREFORE, IN T HE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO AND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY THE WEALTH TAX RETURN AND IF IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURN OLD GOLD ORNAMENTS AND SILVER ORNAMENTS ARE DECLARED IN THE VDI SCHEME, THE AO SHOULD VERIFY THE SAME AND DECID E THE MATTER AFRESH AS PER LAW. CONSEQUENTLY GROUND NO.1 FOR AS SESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 34. IN THE RESULT, ALL DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE DISMISS ED AND MT. MANORAMA AGRAWAL VS. ACIT, I.T.(SS).A.NOS. 62 TO 67 & 97/IND/2014 & 39, 40 & 90/IND/2014 A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10 AND 2010 - 11 . 33 33 THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN I.T.A.NO. 39/IND/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IS DISMISSED AND APPEALS IN I.T.(SS).A .NOS. 40 & 90/IND/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 AND 2010-1 1 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08 TH DECEMBER, 2015. SD/- (B. C. MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- ( D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 08 TH DECEMBER, 2015. CPU* 2716