Appeal partially allowed, unexplained investment deletion upheld, CIT(A) directions dismissed

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by the assessee, deleting the addition of Rs. 91,27,000/- towards unexplained investment. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed. The directions by the CIT(A) for subsequent assessment years were deemed unrelated and dismissed as infructuous. The order was pronounced on 26th September 2018.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Addition of Rs. 1,03,11,095/- towards unexplained investment in the purchase of villas.
3. Direction to consider cash payments of Rs. 25,00,017/- and Rs. 12,81,183/- for subsequent assessment years.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Notice Issued Under Section 148:
The assessee argued that the CIT(A) should not have upheld the notice issued under Section 148, claiming it was void ab initio. However, the Tribunal found that the assessee did not raise this ground in the original appeal memo or before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) made a passing remark on the validity of the initiation of proceedings under Section 147, but no specific ground was adjudicated. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed this ground as infructuous since it was neither born from the CIT(A) order nor from the appeal memo under Form 35, and the assessee did not file a petition for admission of an additional ground.

2. Addition of Rs. 1,03,11,095/- Towards Unexplained Investment:
The assessee purchased villas from Vizag Profiles Group and was alleged to have made payments outside the books of accounts in cash. The AO based the addition on information from the investigation wing, which indicated unaccounted cash payments. The CIT(A) observed discrepancies between the registered sale consideration and the actual payments made by the assessee, concluding that the assessee paid consideration over and above the recorded sale price in cash. The CIT(A) directed the AO to restrict the addition to Rs. 47,99,995/- for the financial year 2008-09 and granted liberty to consider the balance in subsequent years.

During the Tribunal hearing, the assessee argued that the entire payment was made during the financial year 2008-09 and provided a reconciliation statement. The Tribunal noted that the seized documents were from the premises of Vizag Profiles Ltd., not the assessee, and the presumption under Section 292C was not applicable. The Tribunal found that the department lacked specific evidence to prove unaccounted payments by the assessee. The general statements made by the Managing Director of Vizag Profiles regarding cash receipts were not sufficient to infer unaccounted payments by the assessee. Thus, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 91,27,000/- and set aside the orders of the lower authorities.

3. Direction to Consider Cash Payments for Subsequent Assessment Years:
The CIT(A) directed the AO to consider cash payments of Rs. 25,00,017/- and Rs. 12,81,183/- for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12, respectively. The Tribunal found this direction unrelated to the impugned appeal under consideration for the assessment year 2009-10. Therefore, this ground was dismissed as infructuous for the year under consideration, and the assessee was granted liberty to appeal in the relevant assessment years.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition of Rs. 91,27,000/- towards unexplained investment and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. The directions given by the CIT(A) for subsequent assessment years were deemed unrelated to the current appeal and dismissed as infructuous. The order was pronounced in the open court on 26th September 2018.

---