TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 758
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of Incometax Act, 1961, dated 28.12 2007 of ACIT, 3(1), Indore[hereinafter referred to as the AO]. 2. The following grounds have been raised in these appeals :- I.T.(SS)A.No. 282/Ind/2014 - A.Y. 2001-02 : "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore, has erred in maintaining the addition made on account of investment in FDRs and interest thereupon at Rs. 44,190/- and Rs. 5,219/- respectively, by treating the same as unexplained, whereas all the FDRs were in the name of family members of the appellant and hence, it is prayed that the amount may kindly be directed to be deleted." I.T.(SS)A.No. 283/Ind/2014 - A.Y. 2002-03 : "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., in response to which the returns of income were filed and cases were selected under scrutiny by issuing statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. The assessee derives income from rental income, income from proprietory-ship concern M/s. Super Diesels and share income from two partnership firms, namely, M/s. Manish Construction, M/s. Ishan Constructions and M/s.Surya Builders & interest income from deposits with Bank and others. Survey u/s 133A was also carried out simultaneously alognwith search at the business premises of the assessee group, wherein some FDRs were found of which photocopies were impounded from the business premises of M/s. Alankar Enterprises and Saakar Infrastructure Private Limited vide page nos. 70 to 76 of BS-4. The fin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Above mentioned FDRs could not be verified and out of these FDRs at Sr. no. 2 & 3 are not recorded they are also not recorded in regular books of accounts or statement of affairs, therefore, this amount of Rs. 44,190 / - is hereby added u/s 68. Above mentioned FDRs are claimed to have been made out of undisclosed income of the assessee, which has been accounted for in his regular books of accounts. Keeping in view these facts an amount of interest @120/0 for six month = Rs. 6.052/- is added in the income of the assessee. Similarly an amount of Rs. 7,517/- Rs. 2.480/- (as shown in statement of affairs) = Rs. 5,037/- @ 12% on FDRs purchased during the AY 2001-02. Total addition on this account is Rs. 13,569/-. Above mentioned FDRs are c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he name of assessee, his father Begraj Wadhwani and his children. The FDRs standing in the name of Begraj Wadhwani do not bear the same FDR number nor it is of such amount. Hence, the FDRs disclosed by Shri Begraj Wadhwani was different and do not explain these FDRs. The assessee has also failed to prove the same whether these FDRs were duly reflected in the return of the assessee or his family members. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that the assessee is the active earning member of the three holders of FDRs, hence, the addition of such unaccounted investment is correctly made in the assessee's hands. Accordingly, the additions of FDR was Rs. 44,190/- and interest thereon of Rs. 5,219/- for assessment year 2001-02, FDR of Rs. 1,00,867/- an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment years on this ground is rejected. 8. Ground no.2 for assessment year 2003-04 relates to maintaining the disallowance of levy of penalty of Rs. 5,000/-, which was levied by the Principal, M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited for violation of their norms. 9. We have considered the facts and materials available on record. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the said addition of penalty on the ground that the assessee has failed to produce relevant vouchers of such penalty and hence exact nature of such penalty could not be ascertained whether it was for infraction of any law, therefore, the same was confirmed. 10. The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the penalty was levied by M/s. Hi....