TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (5) TMI 1073
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cept the amount involved is estimation of profit at 10% on unaccounted turnover. Sine facts are identical, we will deal with the facts relating to asst. year 2001-02 (ITA No.493/Hyd/2011). 4. Briefly the facts are, the assessee a partnership firm is engaged in business of trading in sanitary wares and plastic tanks. A search and seizure operation was conducted in group cases of the assessee on 12-9-2006. Simultaneously, a survey operation was conducted in the assessee's business premises u/s 133A of the Act. Subsequently a notice u/s 153C was issued to the assessee calling for return of income. In response to the notice issued the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2001-02 admitting total income of Rs. 35,796.91. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that as per the inventory of stock found at the time of survey operation on 12- 9-2006, the value of stock was Rs. 32,35,248/-. However, certain loose slips containing noting of receipts found at the residence of Anil Kumar Agarwal, a partner of the assessee firm revealed unaccounted turnover of the assessee firm for the assessment year 2001-02 to 2007-08. On the basis of these seize....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ame and sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer by observing that as the assessee has not been able to substantiate its case with necessary evidences and books of accounts, there is no illegality in the addition made. 7. The learned AR reiterating the submissions made before the department authorities contended that the additions having been made purely on the basis of loose sheets which do not have any evidentiary value, cannot be sustained. It was submitted that the loose sheets only contain rough figures and rough statement such as goods, cash account, cash sales, numbers of certain traders etc. The loose papers by themselves lead to no conclusion and hence estimation of turnover on the basis of such loose sheets is invalid. In support of such contention, the learned AR placed reliance on the following decisions:- i) M/s. All Cargo Global Logistics Limited vs. DCIT (ITA Nos 5018 to 5022 and 5099/Hyd/10 dated 6/7/2012). ii) Atul Kumar Jain vs. DCIT(64 TTJ 786) 8. The leaned AR submitted that presumption u/s 132(4A) is available to revenue only for the limited purpose of search and seizure and cannot over-ride the provisions of section 69 of the Act. Hence....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....). 9. Finally, the learned AR contended that any income added in the hands of the firm on account of unexplained/unaccounted turnover should be allowed to be telescoped in the hands of the partner. In support of such contention, he relied upon a decision of ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in case of Sri Ravinder Kumar (ITA Nos. 387 to 389/Hyd/12 dt. 17-6-2013.) 10. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting the view expressed by the revenue authorities submitted that as the loose slips were seized from the possession of the Managing Partner Sri Anil Kumar Agarwal and as they revealed unaccounted transaction of the assessee firm, the addition made is justified. 11. We have heard the parties, perused the orders of the revenue authorities as well as other material on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon by the learned AR. It is not disputed that during the search and seizure operation, certain documents were found in the possession of Sri Anil Kumar Agarwal who happens to be the partner of the assessee firm. The documents did reveal certain transaction relating to sanitary ware with amounts and names of certain traders. Though it is the contention of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e amount of guess work is necessary. However, the estimation made should be reasonable and must have reasonable nexus with the materials on record. In the present case, when the assessee has admittedly not produced its books of accounts before the revenue authorities, there is no option left with them but to estimate the profit of the assessee. However, profit has to be estimated applying a reasonable rate. In the present case search has taken place on 12-9-2006 i.e., in financial year 2006-07 relevant to the asst. Year 2007-08. Therefore, taking it as a base we direct the Assessing Officer to estimate the profit on unaccounted turnover at double the rate of the average net profit declared by the assessee for the asst. Year 2007-08 and the preceding two assessment years i.e., asst. year 2005-06 and 2006-07. Further, the Assessing Officer must ensure that there cannot be inclusion of disclosed turnover while estimating profit from undisclosed turnover as per the seized material. In other words, turnover already disclosed should be excluded from the unaccounted turnover. Following the decision of co-ordinate bench in case of Sri Ravinder Kumar (supra), we direct the Assessing Office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not correct as the net profit ought to have been estimated at 0.96% of the undisclosed turnover. Further, the department cannot make addition on one side by taking the percentage of profit and again for unaccounted purchases. The Assessing Officer however without accepting the explanation of the assessee added the amount of Rs. 1,61,33,902/- to the income of the assessee. Being aggrieved of such addition, the assessee challenged the same in the appeal preferred before the CIT (A). 19. Before the CIT (A), it was submitted by the assessee that the Assessing Officer should not have made any addition on account of peak purchases as the Assessing Officer has artificially worked out the purchases for each financial year making out the peak purchases of Rs. 1,61,33,902. It was further submitted that the Assessing Officer by making out the total unaccounted sales at Rs. 2,02,50,912/- has reduced the net gross profit amounting to Rs. 41,17,010/-. It was submitted by the assessee that the addition made on account of peak purchases being purely imaginary figures, it has to be deleted. The CIT (A) after considering the submissions of the assessee deleted the addition by holding as under:- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cuments. Therefore, the finding of the CIT (A) in this regard appears to be just and reasonable. The learned DR could not advance any convincing argument to enable us to take a contrary view. In aforesaid view of the matter, we are inclined to uphold the order of the CIT (A) on this issue by determining the grounds raised. 21. In the result, department appeal is dismissed. ITA No. 921/Hyd/11 Anil Kumar Agarwal (By assessee) 22. The only issue in this appeal which is also a common issue in other appeals of the assessee, is with regard to the addition of unaccounted interest income. 23. Briefly the facts are, the assessee is an individual. A search and seizure operation was conducted in case of Jai Balaji group cases on12-9-2006. The assessee is a partner of Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores in whose case a survey was conducted simultaneously. As alleged by the department, during the search and seizure operations conducted, certain slips/documents were found and seized from the possession of the assessee which reflected unaccounted sales of the partnership firm Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores. As a consequence of the search and seizure operation, a notice u/s 153A was sent to the assessee ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing Officer has made the addition has no evidentiary value. Further, the CIT (A) having held that assessee has not made any money lending business, the question of earning interest from money lending would not arise. The AR submitted that the Assessing Officer himself has stated that the entries appearing in the loose sheets pertaining to Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores, that being the case, no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee. It was submitted that as the Assessing Officer has already treated the entries appearing in the loose sheets as undisclosed income of Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores adding the same in the hands of the assessee would result in double taxation of the same income. 26. The learned DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the CIT (A). 27. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the materials on record. As is evident from the finding of the Assessing Officer on the basis of entries made in the loose sheets referred to by him he has concluded that they represent assessee's unaccounted income from money lending business. However, a perusal of the said seized documents, copies of which have been placed before us, for instanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase of land at Nanakramguda, Serilingampally, RR District from Gulab Singh & others. Further, revenue stamped receipts by Gulab Singh and others were also found and seized in token of receipt of cash from the assessee towards sales consideration as per the agreement of sale dated 18- 6-2001. The total amount as per the receipts is Rs. 4,60,000/-. When asked to explain the assessee submitted that though he had entered into agreement of sale but when he found that the property is a government land, the deal was cancelled and the amount was received back. The Assessing Officer however, mentioning that the assessee has not been able to produce any evidence to show that he has received back the amount and he has failed to prove source of such investment, treated the amount of Rs. 4,60,000/- as unexplained investment for the year under consideration and added it to the income of the assessee. The assessee challenged the addition before the CIT (A). The CIT (A) also sustained the addition by holding that the payment of Rs. 4,60,000/- by the assessee has not been disputed. However, the assessee has not been able to explain the source of investment of Rs. 4,60,000/- and accordingly, he con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith Smt. Chandrakala for purchase of the land for which he has paid the advance of Rs. 2,10,000/-. However, subsequently when he came to know that the land in question is a government land, he cancelled the agreement and the advance was returned back to him. It was therefore submitted that the amount of Rs. 2,10,000/- need not be added. The Assessing Officer however stated that though the assessee might have received back the amount on cancellation of the agreement but the assessee has not been able to explain the source for the amount of Rs. 2,10,000/- invested by him. He further observed that the assessee had failed to establish that the amount in question has been recorded in the books of accounts. He therefore treated the amount of Rs. 2,10,000/- as unexplained investment and added it to the income of the assessee. 34. On appeal, the CIT (A) also confirmed such addition. 35. The learned AR submitted before us that the amount was advanced from the cash balance available with the assessee as well as others in the group. It was submitted that the assessee has explained the source of such advance in the cash flow statement of the assessee as well as other members of the group whe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is appeal is similar and identical to the issue decided by us in ITA No.921/Hyd/11. Following the same, we direct the assessing officer to delete the addition. ITA No.1157/Hyd/11 (by assessee) 39. First issue relating to addition of Rs. 29,11,350/- raised in this appeal is similar and identical to the issue decided by us in ITA No.921/Hyd/11. Following the same, we direct the assessing officer to delete the addition. 40. The next issue is with regard to the addition of Rs. 10,75,000/- as unexplained investment. 41. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer while examining the seized material marked as A/Hima/Res/13 found that the assessee has given loan of Rs. 10 lakh on 21-4- 2003 at the rate of 9.25% per month to Sai Raghavendra construction represented by Sri M. Janardhan. The assessee has initially denied that neither he has entered into any such transaction or he has paid any advance. The Assessing Officer issued summons to Sri Janardhan and recorded a statement from him. In the statement recorded, Sri Janardhan admitted that the seized document is memorandum of understanding between M/s Raghavendra Constructions, himself and Anil Kishore Agarwal in r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the assessee stated that the assessee has actually paid Rs. 2 lakh to the person concerned in the year 1997-98 to purchase his property. However due to some family problems, the deal could not go through and Sri Goud also did not pay back the money. Therefore, the assessee was forced to settle the amount by making him to execute the sale deed and return back the amount of Rs. 10 lakh along with compensation amounting to Rs. 8 lakh. However, Sri Goud due to his bad financial position could return back only Rs. 2 lakh which was paid by the assessee to him. It was submitted that the assessee never purchased the property in question. In this context, he produced Encumbrance Certificate. The Assessing Officer however believing the explanation of the assessee added the amount of Rs. 8 lakh. The CIT (A) also confirmed such addition by holding that the assessee has failed to explain the source of the loan advance of Rs. 8 lakh. 45. We have heard the parties and perused the orders of the revenue authorities as well as other material on record. It is evident from the assessment order that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee has only admitted of having advanced an amount....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....investment and added it to the income of the assessee. The addition made was challenged in appeal before the CIT (A). 49. The CIT (A) confirmed the addition by stating that the assessee has failed to explain satisfactorily the source of investment. 50. The learned AR submitted before us that the amount of Rs. 2.50 lakh was paid out of cash available with the assessee and other members of the group. In this context, he referred to the statement showing cash available with the family members and statement showing peak cash payment. 51. The learned DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the CIT (A). 52. We have heard the parties and perused the orders of the revenue as well as relevant material on record. This issue is similar to the issue raised in ITA No.1155/Hyd/11. Following our decision given therein in paragraph-37, we remit this matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 53. The next issue is relating to the addition of Rs. 35,00,000/- as unexplained investment. While examining the seized material i.e. Sheet Nos. 67 to 70, the Assessing Officer found the same to be an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rpose of obtaining bank loan. It is further evident that assessee has also produced Encumbrance Certificate to show the property was not transferred to the assessee. Therefore, only on the basis of the so called receipts, the Assessing Officer could not have made the addition. When the assessee has disputed the seized material by stating that they are forged document created for the purpose of attracting prospective buyers and earning profit, it was the duty of the Assessing Officer to make further enquiry with the concerned persons, who are supposed to have received the amount in question to ascertain the truth as to whether the payment is actually made by the assessee or not. Without conducting any enquiry, the Assessing Officer was not justified in making the addition. Therefore, we are of the view that the addition having been made without proper evidence cannot be sustained. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the same. 57. The next issue relates to the addition of Rs. 5 lakh as unexplained investment. An agreement dated 3-6-2005 seized at the time of search and seizure operation revealed that the assessee has given an advance of Rs. 5 lakh to Mohd. Khurda....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvestment. Facts relating to the issue are during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee has entered into memorandum of understanding dated 12-8-2005,( seized during the search and seizure operation) with Samavesam of Telugu Baptist Churches (STBC) for the development of the property bearing bungalow No.51 with house No.9-1-170 to 177 comprising of 4600 sq. yards. The document further revealed that the assessee had paid an amount of Rs. 2.50 lakhs each through separate DDs dated 12-8-2005 drawn on AP Mahesh Co-operative Bank, Sultan Bazaar, Hyderabad and one lakh in cash. Thus, the total amount paid is Rs. 5 lakh. When called upon by the Assessing Officer to explain the source, the assessee stated that the property in question belonging to STBC was to be taken by the assessee and his wife Smt. Deepa Agarwal for which the pay order of Rs. 5 lakh was made by drawing from the bank account of Smt. Deepa Agarwal. However, since the deal did not materialize, the DDs issued were cancelled. The Assessing Officer however was not convinced with the explanation of the assessee by observing that the assessee has not explained the source of amount of Rs. 6 lakh an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....On perusal of the discussion made by the Assessing Officer in para-(g) at page-7 of the assessment order and in para (e) at page-9 of the assessment order, it appears that the investment of Rs. 5 lakh relates to the same transaction. Further, it is very much evident from the computation of income that though the Assessing Officer has considered the amount of Rs. 5 lakh for addition on two occasions but he has made specific discussion with regard to the addition of Rs. 5 lakh only once in para (g) at page-14 of the order. So far as the second addition of Rs. 5 lakh, there is absolutely no discussion by the Assessing Officer. The CIT (A) has also failed to verify the factual aspect of the issue as to whether two separate additions of Rs. 5 lakh relates to the same transaction. In absence of any clarification on this issue either from the assessee or from the department, we are left with little option but to remit the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify the factual aspect of the issue and decide the matter afresh. However, we make it clear that if the second addition of Rs. 5 lakhs also relate to the same transaction, no addition can be made. The Assessing Officer s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ires to be examined afresh by the Assessing Officer who must verify the cash availability with the assessee and thereafter decide the issue. The Assessing Officer must afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in the matter. 71. The next issue is with regard to the addition of Rs. 33,42,500/- being unexplained cash found at the time of search. As noted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, at the time of search and seizure operation on 12-9-2006 cash of Rs. 33.42,500/- was found out of which an amount of Rs. 32 lakhs was seized. In course of search operations, the assessee made declarations u/s 132(4) of an amount of Rs. 50 lakh. In the course of search operations, when the assessee was asked to explain about the cash found, he explained that out of the cash found Rs. 4 lakh belongs to his father in law. So far as the balance cash is concerned, it was stated that he is not in a position to explain the details immediately. However, during the assessment proceedings, the assessee explained cash found during search as under:- i) Cash available in the cash book of M/s Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores (Opening cash balance as on 12-9-06) -Rs.11,36,664 ii) C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en adequately explained in the cash flow statement submitted before the lower authorities which are not at all been verified. On a perusal of the CIT (A)'s order we find that the observation made by the CIT (A) is cryptic and bereft of any reason. It is not forthcoming from the order of the Assessing Officer or CIT (A) whether the cash flow statement submitted by the assessee has been examined. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion, without properly examining cash flow statement of the assessee and other family members, it is not proper to add the entire amount of cash found at the time of search at the hands of the assessee considering the fact that not only some amount of cash maybe belonging to the family members are also there but it is also quite possible that there may be some cash available relating to the business of the partnership firm. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, we therefore remit the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer who shall make proper verification by examining the entire issue and other materials like cash flow statement of the assessee as well as other family members and take a decision afresh after affording a reasonable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....manner worked out the peak unaccounted purchases in the case of the assessee for asst. year 2001-02 to 2007-08 and has made separate addition on account of alleged undisclosed purchases. It was submitted that the Assessing Officer had taken the alleged unaccounted sales and after reducing estimated GP there from had worked out the purchases and has made addition by estimating the profit in such unaccounted sales in case of Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores, a partnership firm. However, the Assessing Officer has again considered the same figures as amounts given by the assessee for money lending and treated as unexplained investment in the case of the assessee. It was therefore contended by the assessee that the Assessing Officer has treated the same sales which are worked out from loose sheets for the purpose of estimating the profit on unaccounted sales at the hands of the partnership firm and again considered the noting made in the same seized material while making the addition on account of unexplained investment in the money lending business in the hands of the assessee. It was submitted by the assessee that the names as appearing in the seized material against which amounts have been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sclose interest received by the assessee. 79. The learned AR, on the other hand, submitted that the addition is made on the basis of entries appearing in the loose sheets seized at the time of search which are taken as undisclosed sales made in the assessment of partnership firm M/s Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores and hence the same amount cannot be considered to be the assesee's investment in money lending business and added to the income of the assessed. The learned AR submitted that the entries made in the seized document actually represent sales made to various traders doing business in sanitary ware, hence they cannot be treated as assessee's investment in money lending business. 80. We have heard the parties and perused the material on record. As can be seen the Assessing Officer in para -1(a) of the assessment order has referred to certain seized material while quantifying the unaccounted investment of Rs. 27,65,000/-. As can be seen, the CIT(A) after examining the seized material and other evidence has found that the names appearing in the seized materials are traders in sanitary wares and ceramic tiles, who are having business link with M/s Jai Balaji Sanitary Stores, where a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eturn of income for the impugned assessment year. In response to such notice, the assessee filed a return of income on 19-11-2008 declaring total income of Rs. 1,59,833/-. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer on verifying the seized material found that as per the agreement of sale dated 22-11-2005 the assessee entered into an agreement with one Sri D. Manmohan towards purchase of house property at door No.1-2-332/ 2 to 8 at Gaganmahal Road, Hyderabad. As per the agreement an amount of Rs. 5 lakh was paid by the assessee through cheque No.389173 dated 22-11-2005 drawn on AP Mahesh Co-op. Bank, Hyderabad. Similarly, some other documents seized relating to the aforesaid transaction revealed that the assessee had paid total amount of Rs. 40 lakh towards the purchase of property to Sri D. Manmohan. 85. During the post search proceedings when the assessee was asked to explain she stated that the contents of the receipts are not correct and actually no such transaction has taken place. However, on the basis of the seized material the Assessing Officer was of the view that as per the provision contained u/s 132 (4A) of the Act it has to be presumed that the assessee h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts claim that no cheque mentioned in the agreement of sale was ever en-cashed. Thus, it was contended that the addition made is without any basis. 88. The learned DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the revenue authorities. 89. We have heard the parties and perused the orders of the revenue authorities as well as other material on record. As can be seen the addition of Rs. 15 lakh has been made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT (A) solely on the basis of seized material i.e., agreement of sale dated 22-11-2005. However, as would be evident from the assessment order, during the assessment proceedings itself the assessee had disputed the authenticity of the agreement of sale by claiming that the said document was neither signed by her nor by Sri D. Manmohan the owner of the property. It is also a fact that the property in question has been sold to a different person as would be evident from the copy of the registered sale deed dated 15-12-2006, a copy of which is placed at page-35 of the paper book. On a careful examination of the agreement of sale and final sale deed, it appears that the signature of Sri D. Manmohan are different. It is also a fact that S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the sale price was reduced to Rs. 55 lakh and the registration was made after receipt of the amount of Rs. 55 lakh with an oral agreement that the amount of Rs. 25 lakh received in cash would be returned back to the assessee after the cheques were en-cashed. It was also stated by Smt Sukanya that after the registration was done for a consideration of Rs. 55 lakh, the amount of Rs. 25 lakh was returned back to the assessee on 6-9-2005 which was also acknowledged by the assessee. 91. The Assessing Officer being of the opinion that the assessee has failed to explain the source of Rs. 25 lakh given to Smt. D. Sukanya proposed to treat the same as unexplained investment of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Assessee submitted that the payment made to Smt. D. Sukanya has been reflected in the regular returns filed by the assessee. It was submitted that the investment was made by withdrawing from different bank accounts as well as out of own capital. It was submitted that the entire transaction has been disclosed to the department in the return of income filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2006-07 and is also reflected in her bank statement. The Assessin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we are inclined to remit the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer who shall decide the same afresh after considering all facts and materials on record and after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Hence, this ground is allowed for statistical purposes. 95. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. ITA NO.497/Hyd/11:- 96. The only issue in the present appeal is with regard to the addition of Rs. 25 lakh as unexplained investment towards purchase of a property belonging to Sri D. Manmohan at Gaganmahal. This issue is identical to the issue raised in ground No.1 of ITA No.496/Hyd/11. Following our decision while deciding the similar issue in that appeal, we delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Hence, this ground is allowed. 97. In the result, the appeal is allowed. ITA No.1225/Hyd/11- 98. The only issue in the present appeal is in respect of denial of exemption u/s 54F of the Act. Briefly stated facts are, during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that during the relevant financial year, the assessee has sold diamonds worth Rs. 9,82....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecord as well as orders of the revenue authorities on this issue. It is the contention of the learned AR that not only the property is situated at residential areas but the construction has been made for residential purpose only. Therefore, the finding of the departmental authorities that it is a commercial property is without any basis. In support of such contention, the learned AR has relied upon a decision of co-ordinate bench in case of Sri M.V.Subramanyeswara Reddy (HUF) and others ( ITA Nos. 1014- 1022/Hyd/09 dated 27-12-2011) and in the case of Shyamlal Tandon vs. ITO (ITA No.1774/Hyd/2012). On a perusal of the proposed residential lay out plan and proposed residential plan, copies of which have been placed in paper book, and also approval letter of Grampanchay at page-7 of the paper book, it appears that the house in question is a residential house constructed in a residential area. However, the contention of the department is that the assessee has violated the plan and has made construction of a commercial building. On what basis, such conclusion has been reached is not forthcoming from the materials on record. Though the Assessing Officer has stated that the DDIT (Inv.) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs to the assessee and not to the assessee's husband Sri Anil Kishore Agarwal. The CIT (A) also confirmed the addition by approving the view of the Assessing Officer. 104. We have heard the parties and perused the material on record. As can be seen from the assessment stage itself the assessee has claimed that the transaction relating to the property in question does not belong to her. It is also a fact that the as per the Assessing Officer's own finding, the seized material are unsigned receipts. Therefore, it is not understood how the receipts which are not signed can be considered to be relating to the assessee when there are no other materials to suggest that the assessee has paid the amount of Rs. 1,30,000/-. In the aforesaid circumstances, we are of the view that the addition made is without any basis. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the same. 105. In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed. M/s Sri Iswarlal Agarwal (ITA No.922/Hyd/11) 106. The only issue in the present appeal is with regard to the addition of an amount of Rs. 4 lakh as unaccounted income. As noted by the Assessing Officer during the survey operation u/s 133A of the Act ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tnership firm, he has only received back his capital. Hence, no income has accrued o the assessee. In this context, the learned AR referred to the order of the co-ordinate Bench in case of Sri Raj K. Agarwal in ITA No.1692/Hyd/2010 dated 12-1-2012. 109. The learned DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the departmental authorities. 110. We have heard the submission of the parties and perused the material on record. As can be seen from the statement of Sri C. Srinivasa Reddy the amount of Rs. 4 lakh was paid to the present assessee on dissolution of t he partnership, towards 50% share held by Raj Kumar Agarwal. It is to be noted here, while disposing of the appeal filed by the department in case of Rajkumar Agrwal in ITA No.1692/Hyd/2010 dated 12-1-2012, the Tribunal made the following observation:- "We have heard both the parties ad perused the materials available on record. We verified he facts of the cased and find that the assessee has reeived only Rs. 2 lakhs which is evident from the release deed dated 25-1-2006, whereas the other Rs. 8 lakhs was received by S/Sri Ishwarlal Agarwal and Anil Kumar Agarwal being the contribution made by hem in the business. It is a....