TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 206
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....T. Department. In that factual matrix of the matter, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act for Assessment Year 2005-06, issued notice under Section 148 of the Act and made a reference to the District Valuation Officer ('DVO') for valuation of the said property. The DVO valued the property at Rs. 62,45,000. As the assessee could explain the source of investment therein only to the extent of Rs. 15,52,707, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 48,42,501 being the balance unexplained portion of the investment in the order of assessment for Assessment Year 2005-06 passed under Section 143(3) rws 147 of the Act vide order dt.30.12.2008. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order of assessment for Assessment Year 2005-06 dt.30.12.2008, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT (Appeals), Mysore. The learned CIT (Appeals) disposed the assessee's appeal vide order dt.16.3.2011, confirming the unexplained investment of the assessee in the residential building at Somwarpet to the extent of Rs. 34,46,256 under Section 69B of the Act. The learned CIT (Appeals), however, agreed with the contention of the assessee that the property in question wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tical except for ground No.6 for Assessment Year 2003-04 where the assessee challenges the action of the Assessing Officer in treating the claim of agricultural income of Rs. 1,38,500 as not acceptable and taxing the same as unexplained income. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal for A.Y. 2003-04 :- "1. The impugned order of assessment is liable to set aside in so far as it is incorrect, improper, irregular, opposed facts and circumstances of the case and opposed to the law. 2. The learned CIT (Appeals), Mysore erred in upholding the validity of the impugned order of assessment made under Section 147 rws 150 of the Income Tax Act and that it is not barred by limitation under Section 149(1) of the Act. 3. The learned CIT (Appeals), Mysore erred in upholding the validity of the impugned order of assessment made under Section 147 rws 150 of the Income Tax Act holding that the provisions of Section 150(1) are clearly attracted. 4. The impugned order of assessment made under Section 147 rws 150 of the Income Tax Act is illegal and void in so far as the same is made by the Assessing Officer without assuming jurisdiction under Section 147 of the Act. 5. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal, etc. 5.2 The assessee contends that the observations of the learned CIT (Appeals) in the order for Assessment Year 2005-06 are only passing remarks and cannot be taken to contain or constitute "a finding or direction". In support of this contention, the assessee placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements :- (i) Southern India Plywood Company V ACIT in ITA No.722/Bang/2010 dt.29.6.2012. (ii) Rajinder Nath V CIT in 120 ITR 14 (SC). (iii)Consolidated Coffee Ltd. V ITO 155 ITR 729 (Kar). The learned CIT (Appeals), however, has distinguished the facts of the assessee's case with the findings made by the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the above cited cases and confirmed the actions of the Assessing Officer. 5.3.1 We have considered the issue raised, the rival contentions put forth in this regard and the material on record; including the decisions relied on by the assessee. In the case of Southern India Plywood Company (supra), the co-ordinate bench following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajinder Nath (supra) held at para 7.4 of its order that :- " ....when the Hon'ble High Court has chosen to us....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs." iv. The appellant submissions were that she withdrawn an amount of Rs. 9,12,707 for the property in the F.Y. 2002-03 and further Rs. 5,00,000 during F.Y. 2003-04. v. The total investment in the property needs to be spread over Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2005-06. vi. The total amount may be allocated equally in all the three assessment years involved. Thus the addition to be made on account of unexplained investment has to be worked out to be Rs. 36,46,256 spread over the three assessment years. The addition works out to Rs. 12,15,417 in each assessment year. The addition on account of unexplained investment is confirmed to the extent of Rs. 12,15,417 in the year under appeal. The A.O. is at liberty to take necessary steps to tax the remaining unexplained investment in the other two years. 5.3.4 From the above, in our view, it is evident that the learned CIT (Appeals) has given a clear finding that the unexplained investment in the residential property fall in three years relevant to Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2005-06. The learned CIT (Appeals) has also rendered a finding that the addition to be made on account of unexplained investment in the said property may be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. 7.3 The assessee, we find, has not been able to controvert the findings of the Assessing Officer either in the first appellate proceedings before the learned CIT (Appeals) or in the proceedings before us. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence being put forth to controvert the findings of the Assessing Officer on this issue, we uphold the decision of the learned CIT (Appeals) in rejecting the claims of the assessee and confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Consequently, Ground NO.6 for Assessment Year 2003-04 is dismissed. 8. As regards the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards unexplained investment of Rs. 1,15,710 for Assessment Year 2003-04 and of Rs. 5,13,517 for Assessment Year 2004-05, it is seen that the Assessing Officer has considered all the evidences produced by the assessee and allowed relief wherever the evidences produced and explanations put forth were found acceptable and has made additions only in respect of those amounts for which no evidence was produced. In the absence of any evidence to controvert the findings of the authorities below, the aforesaid additions made on account of unaccounted investments in the construction o....