TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 1237
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed sources without relying upon any documents/ evidences by CIT(A) is not justified as cash seized was recorded in the books of account. b. Assessee manufactured jewellery at Mumbai and sent to cuttack for retails sale against spot basis, delivery against cash payment. c. As per practice at cuttack office, assessee transfer cash in lump sum to Tijori (Godrej Chest) a/c. d. Assessee removed cash of Rs. 61 from Tijori and give to Mr. Kanharam. All cash is part of assessee books of account. e. The Ld. CIT (A) has not relied on books of account and evidence supported by the appellant. f. The Ld. CIT (A) and AO has erred in ignoring the details of cash submitted by the assessee vide letter dated 06/12/2012. g. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the said disallowance were unjustified and unwarranted. 4. The assessee prays that the said addition of Rs. 61 Lacs be deleted. GROUND NO. 2 1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming and treating the gold jewellery of Rs. 18,15,390/- seized at Mumbai airport, as unexplained investment of the assessee under section 69 of the Income Tax Act. 2. He al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ans. f. It is an admitted position of law that once the assessee explains the credit entry and brings evidence to show that the entry is related to a third party and that credit was that of the third party, the burden would shift to the Assessing Officer to prove that it is not true. g. The Income Tax Officer thus has to establish that the entry was not real but was pseudonymous. h. This burden in the present case in appeal, however, has not been discharged by the Assessing Authority before making addition under the Act nor has he established that the entry was not real but was pseudonymous i. The documentary evidence was adequate to establish all the three ingredients required to be established by the assessee under Section 68, namely, the identity and creditworthiness and the genuineness of the loan transactions. j. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the said disallowance were unjustified and unwarranted. 4. The assessee prays that the said addition of Rs. 30,21,580/- be deleted Ground No.4 1. The assessee prays that the said addition of Rs. 4,89,423/-less: interest on loan of Rs. 15lakh required ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t bringing on record any evidence to prove that the same? as not been incurred for the purpose of business. d. additions cannot be made merely on assumptions or presumptions or surmises or conjectures. e. It is the burden of the Department to prove the correctness of such additions. f. on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the said disallowance were unjustified and unwarranted. g. Hence, the said addition of Rs. 8,374/- needs to be deleted . GROUND NO. 7 1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in actually serving the order on 05/01/2011 but he should have served the order to the assessee on or before 31/12/2010 which was the last date of completion of assessment or make such arrangement that order should beyond the limit of him, therefore the order is barred by limitation. 2. Hence, the said order is time barred, therefore, bad in law and void-ab-initio. GROUND NO. 8 1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the IT Act. 2. The assessee prays that levy of said interest be deleted. GROUND NO. 9 1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in charging interest u/s 271(1)(c)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....18,15,390/, unexplained loans and its interest was sustained. However, the disallowance of rental expenses was restricted to Rs. 36,000/- (out Of total Rs. 66,000/-) and disallowance on account of conveyance was restricted to 10% out of total expenditure claim for Rs. 83,739/-. Thus, aggrieved by the Commission (Appeals) the assessee has filed present appeal before us. 5. We have Ld. AR, of the assessee and Ld. DR of revenue and perused the material on record. In support of additional ground of appeal the Ld. AR, of the assessee argued that a search action was conducted on assessee again on 15.05.2007. The six assessment year immediately preceding assessment year relevant to the previous year were assessment year 2007-08 to 2002-03(descending order). The assessment order for assessment year 2008-09 is out of the purview of section 153A of the Income Tax Act. The assessing officer passed the order for assessment year under consideration u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 150A on 13.12.2010. Thus, the order passed by assessing officer is invalid and is liable to declared as such. The Ld. AR of the assessee further argued that additional ground of appeal is purely legal a nature and does not requir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee field his returned of income only on 26.03.2009. The assessment year 2008-09 was out of the purview of notice u/s. 153A. The assessee has not disputed the validity of assessment of six preceding years. In our considered view the six assessments year as referred in clause (b) of sub section (1) of 153A clearly speaks about six assessment year immediately preceding assessment year relevant to the previous year in which year search is conducted. Further, in our considered view, the assessment year under consideration is out of the preview of scope of section 153A. Since the assessment for the year under consideration was out of the scope of section 153A, thus, the period of limitation prescribed under section 153A(1)(b) has no application for passing the assessment order with a stipulated period as prescribed therein. Hence the order passed by the AO under section 143(3) is within prescribed period of limitation as provided under section 153. The various decision relied by ld AR of the assessee are not applicable on the facts of the grounds of appeal as discussed above, in fact the order passed by AO for the AY under consideration is order under section 143(3) and not under secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITAs No. 7190, 6989, 6990 & 7191/Mum/2010. We have noted that most of the grounds raised in the appeal were restored to the file of AO. Considering the contention of both the parties, the ground no.1 &2 are restored to the file of AO to decide both the ground afresh in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to provide full detail and information which may be required by AO and not to take the adjournment without legitimate ground. 9. In the result, ground no.1 & 2 are allowed for statistical purpose. 10. Ground No.3 relates to addition on loan of Rs. 30,21,580/- and Ground no. 4 relates to proportionate disallowance of interest on loan for Rs. 4,89,423/-. The ld. AR of the assessee argued that assessee has raised similar ground of appeal before the Tribunal in the appeals for AY 2004-05 to 2007-08 and the Tribunal in its order dated 27.04.2016 remanded the similar ground of appeal to the file of AO. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue has not disputed the contention of ld. AR of the assessee. 11. We have considered the contention of both the parties and have gone through the order of Tribunal for AY 2004-05 to 2007-08 wherein on similar ground, the Tribun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment of the Lender (Saraswat Bank) and that of the appellant (ICICI Bank) duly reflecting a further lending of a amount of Rs. 2.4 lacs on 15/11/2006 and 2.4 lacs on 23.11.2006 by the lender to the appellant. 3 Pradeep Jain 2. Copy of the Balance Sheet, Income & Expenditure a/c.and Capital A/c.forA.Y.07-08. 2. Computation of Income for A.Y.07- 08. 3. Income Tax Acknowledgement for A.Y.07-08. 4. Pan card Xerox 5. Ration Card Xerox 6. Xerox copy of the bank passbook of the lender duly reflecting the loan given to the appellant. 7. Confirmation letter for Loan given. 8. Copy of letter dated:11/11/2008 written by the lender to the AO in reply to the notice u/s. 133(6) issued to them confirming the transaction with your appellant. 9. Copy of the Bank Statement of the Lender (Saraswat Bank) and that of the appellant (ICICI Bank) duly reflecting a further lending of a amount of Rs. 2.5 lacs on 15.11.2006 by the lender to the appellant. 4 Mitesh C. Jain 1. Copy of the Balance Sheet, Income & Expenditure a/c.and Capital A/c.forA.Y.07-08. 2. Computation of Income for A.Y.07- 08. 3. Income Tax Acknowledgement for A.Y.07-08. 4. Pan card Xerox 5. Ration Card Xerox 6. Xerox cop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on letter for Loan given. 8. Copy of letter dated:11/11/2008 written by the lender to the AO in reply to the notice u/s. 133(6) issued to them confirming the transaction with your appellant. 9. Copy of the Bank Statement of the Lender (Saraswat Bank) and that of the appellant (ICICI Bank) duly reflecting a further lending of a amount of 33,000/- on 12.01.2007 by the lender to the appellant. 8 Kalpana Pradeep Jain 1. Copy of the Balance Sheet, Income & Expenditure a/c.and Capital A/c.forA.Y.07-08. 2. Computation of Income for A.Y.07- 08. 3. Income Tax Acknowledgement for A.Y.07-08. 4. Pan card Xerox 5. Ration Card Xerox 6. Xerox copy of the bank passbook of the lender duly reflecting the loan given to the appellant. 7. Confirmation letter for Loan given. 8. Copy of letter dated:11/11/2008 written by the lender to the AO in reply to the notice u/s. 133(6) issued to them confirming the transaction with your appellant. 9. Copy of the Bank Statement of the Lender (Saraswat Bank) and that of the appellant (ICICI Bank) duly reflecting a further lending of a amount of Rs. 2 lacs on 08.04.2006 and another Rs. 1 lacs on 15.05.2006 by the lender have also lend Rs. 2.00 lacs which was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inst the Revenue. 12. Considering the decision of Tribunal in assessee's own case for earlier years, these ground of appeal are also restored to the file of AO with the same observation as per order dated 27.04.2006 passed by Tribunal. In the result, Grounds No. 3 & 4 are allowed for statistical purpose. 13. Ground No.5 relates to confirming the addition of Rs. 36,000/- on account of rent of premises at Cuttack. The ld. AR of the assessee fairly argued that similar ground of appeal was decided by the Tribunal against the assessee in assessee's own case for AY 2007-08. The ld. DR for the Revenue submitted that facts of the year under consideration are similar. Hence, the ground of appeal raised by assessee be dismissed. 14. Considering the contention of ld. AR of the assessee that similar ground of appeal for AY 2007-08 was dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 27.04.2016. Hence, this ground of appeal is decided against the assessee. 15. Ground No.6 relates to adhoc disallowance of Travelling Expenses @ 10% of total expenses. The ld. AR of the assessee argued that similar adhoc disallowance was raised against the assessee for AY 2007-08 and the Tribunal has remanded....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... argued that assessment order passed on 31.12.2010 is time barred as the same was not served within period of limitation. It was argued that the assessment order was delivered by him on 05.01.2011. The assessment order should have been served on or before 31.12.2010. Since the assessment order was served on 05.01.2011, it became time barred, therefore, bad-in-law and void ab-initio. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt or his successors to Officer [2011] 12 taxmann.com 198 (Guj.) and decision of Delhi Tribunal in ITO vs. On Exim P. Ltd. (2013) 40 taxmann.com 133 (Del Trib.). Further on record we find that the ld AR for the assessee has filed written notes on various grounds of appeal wherein he has also relied on the decision of Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs Sincere Construction [2015]54 taxman.com 31(Allahabad) and decision of Tribunal In Shanti Lal Godawat Vs ACIT [2009] 126 TTJ 135 (Jodh). On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of authorities below. It was argued that assessment order was made within two year from the end of Assessment ....