Shri Paresh Dalal, Surat V. The ACIT.,Circle-5, Surat

ITSSA 8/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0606 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 12-03-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 11-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T P KRISHNA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Block assessment; Bogus loan
• Section: 69; 132

Judgement Text

` IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BEN CH, AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, J.M. & SHRI ANIL CH ATURVEDI, A.M.) I.T.(SS)A. NO. 08 /AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1995-96 TO 2000- 01 & UP TO 19.12.2001) PARESH DALAL, RAMJINI POLE, GOPIPURA, SURAT V/S THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, SURAT (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: ABXPD0427G APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.P. KRISHNAKUMAR, CIT/D .R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 12-03-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 -03-2015 PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI,A.M. 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE OR DER OF CIT(A)-IV, SURAT DATED 18.10.2010 FOR A.Y. 1995-96 TO 2000-01 & UP T O 19.12.2001. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER. 3. A SEARCH ACTION U/S. 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED AT PARIVAR TELEVISION PVT. LTD. ON 19.12.2001 AND SEARCH ACTION IN JAYRAJ GROU P OF CASES IN DECEMBER 2001 AND JANUARY 2002. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ANNEXURE-BS WERE SEIZED FROM THE PREMISES OF PARIVAR TELEVISION PVT. LTD. AND IT WAS NOTED IT(SS)A NO 8/AHD/ 2011 . A.Y. 1995-96 TO 200 0-01 & UP TO 19.12.2001 2 THAT IT HAD SHOWN RECEIPTS OF UNACCOUNTED LOANS FRO M VARIOUS PARTIES. WHILE FINALIZING THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT OF PARIVAR TELEVISI ON PVT. LTD., DCIT HAD INTIMATED THE A.O OF THE ASSESSEE THAT AS PER SEIZE D MATERIAL, THERE WERE CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSEE WHI CH NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED BY INITIATING PROCEEDING U/S. 158BD OF THE ACT. THE REAFTER NOTICE U/S. 158BD WAS ISSUED ON 29.05.2007 AND ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME. A.O HAS NOTED THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE TH E RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD AND THEREAFTER ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U /S. 158BD R.W.S. 144 VIDE ORDER DATED 29.12.2008 AND THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 1 LAC. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A.O, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF A.O. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFO RE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE R IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 1,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT O F ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS IN FORM OF LOAN GIV EN TO M/S. PTPL U/S. 69 OF THE ACT. 2. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ABOVE ADDITION MAY PLEASE BE DELETED AS LEARNED MEMBERS OF THE TRIBUNA L MAY DEEM IT PROPER. 4. BEFORE US, LD. A.R. REITERATED THE SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND VEHEMENTLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O IS UNCALLED FOR. HE THUS SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION BE DELETED. LD. D. R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF A.O AND LD. CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) WHILE UPHOLDING THE ADDITION H AS NOTED THAT DUE OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE CO URSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF LOA N GIVEN TO PARIVAR IT(SS)A NO 8/AHD/ 2011 . A.Y. 1995-96 TO 200 0-01 & UP TO 19.12.2001 3 TELEVISION PVT. LTD. BUT NOT ACCOUNTED IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. HE HAS NOTED THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH THE EXPLANATION NOR FURNISHED ANY EXPLANATION ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE EVEN BEFORE L D. CIT(A). BEFORE US, LD. A.R. HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO CONT ROVERT THE FINDINGS OF A.O AND LD. CIT(A). WE THEREFORE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND THUS THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEE IS D ISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20 - 03 - 2015. SD/- SD/- (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,A HMEDABAD