TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 505
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. DR ORDER Per G.D. Agrawal, VICE PRESIDENT: This bunch of appeals by the different assessees have been filed against a consolidated order of learned CIT(A)-III, Ahmedabad dated 18.10.2011. Since these appeals involve common issues, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The only common ground raised in all these appeals by various assessees is against the confirmation of the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) by the ld. CIT(A). The name of the assessees, assets which are treated as unexplained and the penalty levied are tabulated at Annexure-1 appended herewith the order. 3. At the time of hearing before us, the ld. Counsel for the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e onus by giving proper explanation with regard to jewelry, cash and other valuables found at the time of search. He, therefore, submitted that the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) in the case of all the assessees should be cancelled. 4. The ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have carefully considered the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. So far as the gold ornaments are concerned, we find that significant part of the gold ornaments have been accepted by the Assessing Officer as explained in the case of all the assessees and only a very small portion is treated as unexplained. For example, in the case of Atulbhai D. Patel, out of 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icient credit for the cash which can be presumed to have been belonging to various family members. Despite giving the above credit, more than 50% of the cash found from each person is treated as unexplained which is accepted by the assessee by not filing the appeal. The assessees' contention is that the substantial withdrawals are for household expenses and therefore, the accumulation of cash is out of saving from house hold withdrawal. This explanation of the assessee cannot be accepted because the withdrawal is not much. 6. The CIT(A) has given at page 17, the year-wise withdrawal for household expenditure by Shri Onilbhai N. Patel, which is reproduced below for ready reference. Ass Year Total withdrawals during the year ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wals during the year 2007-08 230658 135000 2006-07 122635 77500 2005-06 103309 60000 2004-05 127298 99000 2003-04 124385 95000 2002-03 115514 110000 2001-02 88373 79000 Total 912172 655500 From the above, it is evident that his cash withdrawal was less than or around Rs. 10,000/- per month, while total withdrawal was also less than Rs. 20,000/- per month. In the above circumstances, the Assessing Officer has rightly treated the cash of Rs. 58,909/- to be explained and balance Rs. 1,00,00/- as undisclosed income. 8. Almost similar position is in the case of Premanand S. Patel. The total cash found with him was Rs. 3,49,679/-, out of which the Assessing Offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the cash of more than a lac as explained and treated the balance cash of Rs. 1,61,000/- as unexplained being the undisclosed income of the assessee. No proper explanation has been given by the assessee during the penalty proceedings also in respect of unexplained cash found and investments in Kisan Vikas Patrika, NSC, SBI bond etc. 10. After considering the facts of the case and the arguments of both the sides, we are of the opinion that so far the gold ornaments are concerned, the assessee has given the proper explanation for the source of gold ornaments in respect of each and every assessee. The Assessing Officer substantially accepted the assessee's explanation and treated only a small part of the gold ornaments to be unexplained. ....