M/s. Maharaja Developers, Nagpur V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I(I), Nagpur

ITSSA 8/NAG/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0360 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MAYANK PRIYADARSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: M MANI
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Depreciation; Search and seizure; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3); 142(1); 153A; 80IB; 132; 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./IT(SS)NO. 48/NAG/2009 ( AY: 2001 - 2002) ./IT(SS)NO. 49/NAG/2009 ( AY: 2002 - 2003) ./IT(SS)NO. 50/NAG/2009 ( AY: 2003 - 2004) ./IT(SS)NO. 08/NAG/2012 ( AY: 2004 - 2005) ./IT(SS)NO. 09/NAG/2012 ( AY: 2005 - 2006) ./IT(SS)NO. 10/NAG/2012 ( AY: 2006 - 2007) ./IT(SS)NO. 11/NAG/2012 ( AY: 2007 - 2008) M/S. MAHARA JA DEVELOPERS, 444, ANAND NAGAR, SAKKARDARA, NAGPUR. / VS. ACIT - CC - 1(1), AAYAKARBHAVAN, NAGPUR. ./ PAN: AAHFM2997H ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M. MANI / REVENUE BY : SHRI MAYANKPRIYADARSHI, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 04 .09.2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 .09.2014 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THERE ARE 7 APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION INVOLVING ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001 - 02 TO 2007 - 08. ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE CIT (A) - I, NAGPUR COMMONLY DATED 30.6.2009. SINCE, THE GROUNDS RAISED IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE CONN ECTED AND IDENTICAL, THEREFORE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THEY ARE CLUBBED, HEARD COMBINEDLY AND DISPOSED OF IN THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. APPEAL WISE AND GROUND WISE ADJUDICATION IS GIVEN IN THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPHS OF THIS ORDER. 2. SINCE, THE GROUNDS R AISED IN ALL THE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL AND CONSIDERING THE CONNECTIVITY OF THE APPEALS, WE SHALL TAKE UP THE GROUNDS AND THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS FOR ADJUDICATION WHICH ARE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEEWITH REGARD AY 2001 - 02 VIDE IT ( SS ) NO.48/NAG/2009. THE SAID AP PEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 18.9.2009 AGAINST THE 2 SAID ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - I, NAGPUR DATED 30.6.2009. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE GROUNDS AND ADDITIONAL GROUNDS WHICH READ AS UNDER: A. ORIGINAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION FRS. 8,03,500/ - AS UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS. 2. THAT THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 1,00,000/ - AS UNDISCLOSED EXPENDITURE. 3. THAT THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 20,000/ - UNDER SECTION 40A(3). 4. THAT THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON ADDITION TO FIXED ASSETS OF RS. 3,40,463/ - . B. ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD CIT (A) ERRED IN REJECTING THE CLAI M OF ASSESSEE MADE UNDER SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, NO REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN BY THE AO TO REQUIRE THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE MAKING THE ABOVE ADDITIONS. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL IS REQUESTED TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILES OF AO FOR PROPER VERIFICATION. 3. BRIEFLY STATED RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF REAL ES TATE BUSINESS AND FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139 OF THE ACT. THERE WAS SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132 O THE ACT AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 7.11.2006. AS PER THE PANCHANAMA DATED 7.11.2006 THE XEROX COPIES OF THE SEIZED MATERIAL WE RE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE PARTLY ON 16.10.2007 (AFTER 11 MONTHS) AND THE BALANCE DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 19.8.2008. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT, WHICH WAS ISSUED ON 21.3.2007, ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER ON 16.7.2008 AND REQUESTED THAT THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED U/S 139 SHOULD BE TREATED AS COMPLIANCE TO THE SAID NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT, DATED 30.6.2008 ALONG WITH THE DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE BASED ON THE SEIZED MATERIAL. FURTHER, A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE / LETTER DATED 23. 10.2008 WAS ALSO ISSUED. SUBSEQUENTLY, ASSESSEE FILED THE R ETURN ON 14.11.2008. AO ISSUED QUESTIONNAIRE S DATED 7.8.2008 AND 17.11.2008 TO THE ASSESSEE. EVENTUALLY, ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 31.12.2008. IN THE ASSESSMENT, AO MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS ON A CCOUNT OF CASH RECEIPTS; UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE, THE ADDITION U/S 40A(3) OF THE ACT AND DISALLOWANCE OF THE DEPRECIATION ON THE FIXED ASSETS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001 - 2002. FURTHER, THERE ARE OTHER DISALLOWANCES ON VARIOUS OTHER HEADS OF EXPENDITURE F OR THE OTHER ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E., 2002 - 03 TO 2007 - 2008 AND THE DETAILS ARE TABULATED HERE UNDER: 3 AY RETURN OF INCOME U/S 153A / 143(3) TOTAL ADDITIONS NATURE OF ADDITION 2001 - 02 41,850/ - 12,63,963/ - UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS, DEPRECIATION AND U/S 40A(3) 2002 - 03 12,876/ - 21,70,851/ - UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS , DEPRECIATION 2003 - 04 6,77,176/ - 1,00,01,504/ - UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS, DEPRECIATION AND U/S40A(3) 2004 - 05 47,95,480/ - 1,49,74,950/ - UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS, DEPRECIATION ; U/S 40A(3) & DISALLOWANCE U/S 80IB(10) 2005 - 06 6,37,654/ - 71,10,698/ - UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS, DEPRECIATION AND DISALLOWANCE U/S 80IB(10) 2006 - 07 ( - ) 32,125/ - 70,88,985/ - UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS AND DISALLOWANCE U/S 80IB(10) 2007 - 08 NIL ASSESSED U/S 143(3)) 38,83,253/ - UNDISCLOSED CASH RECEIPTS ON INTERIOR WORK AND DISALLOWANCE U/S 80IB(10) 4. FROM THE ABOVE, THE GROSS TOTAL OF THE ADDITIONS FOR ALL THE 7 ASSESSMENT YEARS MADE BY THE AO WORKS OUT OF RS. 4,64,94,204/ - . MATTER TRAVELL ED TO THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. AT THE END OF THE PROCEEDINGS, AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT (A), THE TOTAL ADDITIONS FOR ALL THE SEVEN ASSESSMENT YEARS STAND AT RS. 4,21,65,651/ - . OTHERWISE, THE CIT (A) GRANTED RELIEF FOR ALL THE 7 ASSESSMENT YEARS AT RS. 43,28,553/ - . THERE IS NO APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT (A). AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDERS OF THE CIT (A) FOR ALL THE 7 ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. DURING THE PROC EEDINGS BEFORE US, SHRI M. MANI, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED ORIGINAL GROUNDS AS WELL AS THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS AND NARRATED THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE INSTANT APPEAL. FURTHER, HE FILED AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 30 TH AUGUST, 2014, WHICH IS DULY NOTARIZED, AND MENTIONED THAT THE FACTS RELATING TO SEARCH ACTION AND ITS OUTCOME. THE DEVELOPMENTS RELATING TO THE HEART ATTACK SUFFERED BY THE MANAGING PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS HOSPITALIZATION IN APOLLO HOSPITAL, HYDE RABAD AND THE OTHER FACTS RELATING TO THE SEALING OF THE OFFICE PREMISES BY THE TCOT CONSULTANCY AND SERVICES LTD ON THE INSTRUCTION OF THE UNION BANK OF INDIA FOR THE NON - PAYMENT OF OUTSTANDING AMOUNT OF LOAN OF RS. 1.94 CRS SINCE 10.8.2007 TILL 29.5.2009 ETC. IT ALSO REFERS TO THE FACT THAT 4 THE ASSESSMENTS FOR ALL THE 7 YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE COMPLETED IN RECORD TIME OF 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF FILING OF THE RETURN PURSUANT TO NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT. ITEM NO.16 OF THE SAID AFFIDAVIT REFERS T O THE FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY THE AO BY NOT PROVIDING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF EXPLAINING THE ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN THE AFFIDAVIT, IT IS PRAYED THAT CONSIDERING THE BREACH TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE A SSESSMENT DESERVE TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. IT IS ALSO ASCERTAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE NEVER FAILED TO COOPERATE WITH THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND THE ASSESSEE IS READY TO EXTEND ALL THE COOPERATION TO THE AO IF THE ASSESSMENT ARE NOW SET ASID E. ITEM NO.17 TO 21 OF THE AFFIDAVIT ARE RELEVANT IN THIS REGARD WHICH READ AS UNDER: 16. THEREFORE, THERE WAS FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR NOT GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF EXPLAINING THE ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FROM WHICH ALONE THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS WERE MADE. 17. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT MAKE ANY INDEPENDENT ENQUIRIES EVEN WHEN HE WAS VESTED WITH VAST POWERS WHICH ARE INVESTIGATIVE AND INQUISITORIAL. 18. IN VIEW OF THE STATEMENTS MADE ABOVE, THE RE WAS A TOTAL FAILURE ON PART OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE IT ACT WHICH RESULTED IN HIGH PITCHED ASSESSMENTS AND CONSEQUENT A HUGE DEMAND. 19. THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS BY ITS VERY NATURE ARE ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 20. THEREF ORE, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, THE ASSESSMENTS DESERVED TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WHERE THE ILLEGALITY HAS HAPPENED. 21. WE HAVE NEVER FAILED TO COOPERATE WITH THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT ANY TIME AND IF ASSESSMENTS ARE SET ASIDE, W HICH IS A MUST, WE WILL EXTEND ALL OUR COOPERATION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. IN SUPPORT OF THE HOSPITALIZATION, SEALING OF THE PREMISES ETC., THE ASSESSEE ENCLOSED VARIOUS CORRESPONDENCES AND EVIDENCES. FURTHER, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED THAT THE CIT (A) ERRED IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE MADE U/S 80IB (10) OF THE ACT. FURTHER ALSO , HE MENTIONED THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO ARE NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL , THEREFORE, SUCH ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENTS U/S 153A OF THE ACT ARE REQUIRED TO BE DELETED CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS JUDGMENTS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS VIZ., JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF JAI STEEL (INDIA) VS. ACIT [201 3] 259 CTR 281; BOMBAY HIGH COURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S. MURLI AGRO PRODUCTS LTD VIDE INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.36 OF 2009 DATED 29/10/2010. IT IS THE PRAYER OF THE LD COUNSEL FOR REMANDING ALL THE ASSESSMENTS TO THE FILE OF THE AO CONSIDERING TH E FAILURE OF THE AO IN GRANTING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5 7. ON THE OTHER HAND , SHRI MAYANKPRIYADARSHI, LD DR OPPOSED VEHEMENTLY TO THE SAID PROPOSAL OF THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IT IS THE CLAIM OF THE REVENUE THAT T HE ASSESSEE NEVER COOPERATED TO THE DEPARTMENT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IN SUPPORT LD DR MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE NEVER RESPONDED TO THE NOTICES CALLING FOR FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME AFTER SEARCH ACTION. HE ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE ASSES SEE NEVER PAID TAXES DESPITE THE EXISTENCE OF HUGE OUTSTANDING DEMAND IS THERE. FURTHER, LD DR BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE PROCEEDINGS RECEIVED BY THE REVENUE FOR COLLECTION OF TAXES. FURTHER ALSO THERE WAS A DISCUSSION IN THE BENCH REGARDING THE REVENU E PASSING AN ORDER U/S 281B OF THE ACT DATED 16.4.2007 BY THE ACIT - CC, NAGPUR. ASSESSEE FILED A WRIT PETITION OF MANDAMUS VIDE WP NO.1013/2014 WITH A REQUEST TO THE HONBLE HIGH COURT FOR DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE STOCK - IN - TRADE PARTICULARL Y ASSETS MENTIONED AT SL. NO.10 AND 11 OF THE ANNEXURE - 8 .THESE ASSETS ARE FREE FROM ANY ENCUMBRANCES. HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS PASSED AN ORDER AND THE OPERATING PORTION OF THE SAID JUDGMENT READS AS UNDER: LOOKING TO THE SITUATION, WE DIRECT THE PETITIONER S TO MOVE APPROPRIATE REPRESENTATION POINTING OUT ENCUMBERED OR UNENCUMBERED PROPERTIES AVAILABLE FOR SALE AND ALSO IN THE ALTERNATE, SO THAT HIS PROPOSALS THEN CAN BE EVALUATED BY THE RESPONDENTS. IF THE PROPOSAL IS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS, RESPONDE NTS SHALL TAKE SUCH DECISION UPON IT WITHIN A FURTHER PERIOD OF FOUR WEEKS INDEPENDENTLY. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ITAT, BOMBAY TO ARRANGE FOR AND TO DECIDE THE APPEALS FILED BY THE PETITIONERS WITHIN A PERIOD OF EIGHT WEEKS FROM TODAY. AT THIS STAGE SHRI BHOOT, LD COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER STATES THAT ITAT HAD REMANDED TWO APPEALS WHICH ARE PENDING BEFORE THE CIT APPEALS I.E., FOR THE AY 2007 - 2008 AND 2008 - 2009 QUA THE PETITIONER NO.2. THE SAID AUTHORITY SHALL ATTEMPT TO DECIDE THOSE APPEALS SIMILARLY WITHIN A PERIOD OF EIGHT WEEKS. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS AND WITH LIBERTY TO PETITIONERS TO APPROACH AGAIN, IF THEIR GRIEVANCES IS NOT REDRESSED, WE DISPOSE OF THE WRIT PETITION. NO COSTS. 8. FURTHER, LD DR MENTIONED THAT IN CASE THESE APPEALS ARE SET AS IDE TO T HE FILE OF THE AO, PROPER SAFEGUARDS OF THE REVENUE MAY BE PROVIDED IN THE ORDER I N THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. ON THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL LD DR RELIED ON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH C OURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF M/S. CANARA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY VS. DCIT VIDE ITA NO.38/2014 DATED 25.7.2014. 9. DURING THE REBUTTAL TIME, REITERATING THE REQUEST FOR GRANTING OF ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, LD CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 281B ARE IN THE STATUTE AND THEY PROVIDE REQUISITE SAFEGUARDS . T HEREFORE, LD DR SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY APPREHENSION 6 OF LIKELY SALE OF THE PROPERTIES WHEN THE DEMAND REDUCED CONSEQUENT TO THE SET ASIDE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ALL THE 7 APPEALS. 10. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. THE ASSESSMENT SFOR THE AYS 2001 - 02 TO 2006 - 07 WERE COMPLETED U/S 153A READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. THERE IS A LOT OF DELAY IN THE MATTER OF AUDIT IN G THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 153A OF THE ACT. SUPPLY OF SEIZED MATERIAL BY THE REVENUE IN TWO INSTA LMENTS ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE DELA Y. OF COURSE, ASSESSEE S DELAY IS ALSO OBVIOUS IN NOT FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME WITHIN THE TIME PROVIDED IN THE NOTICE. THERE IS ONLY 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME ULTIMATELY FOR THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO PASS THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS RAISING WITH HUGE ADDITIONS. IT IS MENTIONED IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE US THAT THE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS NOT GIVEN BY THE AO. IT IS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ADDITIONS WILL NOT BE SUSTAINAB LE IF SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND IF THE CONCERNED PEOPLE / DOCUMENTS ARE EXAMINED BY THE AO ADEQUATELY . IT IS ALSO THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ADDITIONS ARE NOT BASED ON ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL. SO FAR AS THE ADEQUATE OPPO RTUNITY IS CONCERNED, IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS A BREACH TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. NOTHING ADVERSE IS BROUGHT BY THE REVENUE BEFORE US AND THAT THE CLAIMS OF THE ASSESSEE MADE IN THE AFFIDAVIT ARE WRONG. WE HAVE NO REASON TO SUSPECT THE CLAIM O F THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED IN THE AFFIDAVIT. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. WE ACCORDINGLY REMAND ALL THESE APPEALS, WHICH INCLUDES APPEAL FOR THE AY 2007 - 2008 WHICH WILL HAVE AN IMPACT OF THE ASSESSMENTS OF THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS QUA THE CLAIMS U/S 80IB(10) OF THE ACT, TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR ADJUDICATING THE APPEALS AFRESH IN A TIME BOUND MANNER. WE ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENTS ON PRIORITY BASIS CONSIDERING THE VOLUME OF ADDITIONS AND DEMAND RECORDED IN THE FIRST ROUND . HE SHALL ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ABOVE, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ANY DIRECTION O F HONBLE HIGH COURT OR JUDGMENT S AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. 11. REGARDING THE REVENUES APPREHENSION ABOUT THE LIKELY SALE OF THE PROPERTY IN CASE THE APPEALS ARE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE AO, AS STATED BY THE LD COUNSEL 7 FOR THE ASSESSEE, THE PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 281B OF THE ACT ARE AVAILABLE TO THE SITUATIONS SEEN IN THIS REGARD. THEREFORE, AO IS FREE TO INITIATE OR CONTINUE THE EXISTING ORDERS OF THE ATTACHMENT, IF ANY, ON THE SAID PROPERTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. . ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 12. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE SEVEN APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10TH SEPTEMBER, 2014. SD/ - SD/ - (VIVEK VARMA) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR 10 /09/2014 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , / DR, ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, ( SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY) / ITAT, NAGPUR