Appeal outcomes for various assessment years: assessee's appeals allowed, revenue's dismissed, 2006-07 appeal partly allowed.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal for AY 2003-04 and allowed all other appeals filed by the assessee. The appeal for AY 2006-07 was partly allowed, and all other appeals of the revenue were dismissed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Addition of Rs. 50,000 for AY 2001-02.
2. Addition of Rs. 1.50 lakh for PTP Nagar Property for AY 2002-03.
3. Addition of Rs. 6.00 lakh for Benz Car for AY 2002-03.
4. Addition of Rs. 20,30,376 for bank deposits for AY 2002-03.
5. Addition of Rs. 10.00 lakh for Anakulam Estate for AY 2003-04.
6. Addition of Rs. 50.00 lakh for peak credit in banks for AY 2004-05.
7. Addition of Rs. 22,33,416 for peak credit in banks for AY 2005-06.
8. Addition of Rs. 12.88 crore for commission income for AY 2006-07.
9. Addition of Rs. 2.93 crore for peak credit in banks for AY 2006-07.
10. Disallowance of Rs. 35.00 lakh professional charges for AY 2007-08.
11. Addition of Rs. 53.00 lakh for premium income for AY 2007-08.
12. Addition of Rs. 40.00 lakh for unexplained investment for AY 2007-08.
13. Addition of Rs. 2.77 crore for peak credit in banks for AY 2007-08.

Summary:

1. Addition of Rs. 50,000 for AY 2001-02:
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 50,000 confirmed by Ld CIT(A). The Ld CIT(A) found that the agreement between the assessee and his wife did not show any consideration of Rs. 4.50 lakh. The AO's observation was not correct. The Ld CIT(A) granted relief of Rs. 4.00 lakh and confirmed Rs. 50,000. The Tribunal found no justification in confirming the addition of Rs. 50,000 and directed the AO to delete the addition.

2. Addition of Rs. 1.50 lakh for PTP Nagar Property for AY 2002-03:
The assessee explained the sources for Rs. 19.00 lakh investment in PTP Nagar Property. The AO added Rs. 13.00 lakh as unexplained investment. The Ld CIT(A) granted set off of Rs. 10.50 lakh and confirmed Rs. 1.50 lakh. The Tribunal found that the assessee used the refund of Rs. 4.50 lakh from Smt. Mary Mathew for the payment and directed the AO to delete the entire addition of Rs. 13.00 lakh.

3. Addition of Rs. 6.00 lakh for Benz Car for AY 2002-03:
The AO added Rs. 6.00 lakh for the purchase of Benz Car. The Ld CIT(A) deleted the addition as there was no evidence that the car was purchased during the year. The Tribunal upheld the deletion.

4. Addition of Rs. 20,30,376 for bank deposits for AY 2002-03:
The AO added Rs. 35.45 lakh for unexplained bank deposits. The Ld CIT(A) deleted Rs. 11.00 lakh and confirmed Rs. 20,30,376. The Tribunal found that the deposits represented real estate transactions and directed the AO to delete the entire addition of Rs. 35.45 lakh.

5. Addition of Rs. 10.00 lakh for Anakulam Estate for AY 2003-04:
The AO computed the profit on sale of Anakulam Estate at Rs. 38.59 lakh. The Ld CIT(A) determined the profit at Rs. 10.00 lakh after considering the land used for internal roads. The Tribunal upheld the decision of Ld CIT(A).

6. Addition of Rs. 50.00 lakh for peak credit in banks for AY 2004-05:
The AO added Rs. 98.65 lakh as peak credit balance. The Ld CIT(A) determined the income at Rs. 50.00 lakh. The Tribunal found that the deposits represented real estate transactions and directed the AO to delete the entire addition.

7. Addition of Rs. 22,33,416 for peak credit in banks for AY 2005-06:
The AO added Rs. 85.77 lakh as peak credit balance. The Ld CIT(A) determined the income at Rs. 22,33,416. The Tribunal found that the deposits represented real estate transactions and directed the AO to delete the entire addition.

8. Addition of Rs. 12.88 crore for commission income for AY 2006-07:
The AO assessed Rs. 12.88 crore as commission income. The Ld CIT(A) found that the assessee received Rs. 4.88 crore and paid Rs. 2.09 crore for labour settlement. The Tribunal upheld the decision of Ld CIT(A).

9. Addition of Rs. 2.93 crore for peak credit in banks for AY 2006-07:
The AO added Rs. 2.93 crore as peak credit balance. The Ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. The Tribunal upheld the deletion.

10. Disallowance of Rs. 35.00 lakh professional charges for AY 2007-08:
The AO disallowed Rs. 35.00 lakh paid to Markose & Markose. The Ld CIT(A) deleted the disallowance. The Tribunal upheld the deletion.

11. Addition of Rs. 53.00 lakh for premium income for AY 2007-08:
The AO added Rs. 53.00 lakh based on a receipt. The Ld CIT(A) found the revocation agreement valid and deleted the addition. The Tribunal upheld the deletion.

12. Addition of Rs. 40.00 lakh for unexplained investment for AY 2007-08:
The AO added Rs. 40.00 lakh for unexplained investment. The Ld CIT(A) found sufficient funds available and deleted the addition. The Tribunal upheld the deletion.

13. Addition of Rs. 2.77 crore for peak credit in banks for AY 2007-08:
The AO added Rs. 2.77 crore as peak credit balance. The Ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. The Tribunal upheld the deletion.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal for AY 2003-04 and allowed all other appeals filed by the assessee. The appeal for AY 2006-07 was partly allowed, and all other appeals of the revenue were dismissed.

---