TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 1719
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e income enhanced by the CIT(A) in various cases, and the Revenue is also in appeal on issues where certain reliefs have been allowed by the CIT(A). Since it was a common point between the rival counsel that the substantive dispute is identical in all the appeals, the appeal in the case of Jagdishsingh Amritsingh Bindra vide ITA No. 887/Pn/2012 pertaining to the asst. yr. 2003-04 is considered as the lead case in order to understand the rival positions. 3. ITA No. 887/Pn/2012 is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of the CIT(A)-II, Nashik dt. 27th March, 2012 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dt. 24th Dec, 2008 passed by the AO under s. 153A r/w s. 143(3) of the Act, pertaining to asst. yr. 2003-04. 4. In this appeal, the following substantive grounds of appeal have been raised : "2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in enhancing the income by Rs. 2,68,74,825 employing an imaginary method of decoding the figures. The learned CIT(A) further erred in enhancing the income for which no source was processed by the AO which is contrary to the powers vested in CIT(A) under s. 251 of the Act (original grou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....return so filed was subject to scrutiny assessment and in the ensuing assessment made under s. 153A(l)(b) r/w s. 143(3) of the Act on 24th Dec, 2008 the total income has been determined at Rs. 52,93,000 as against the return of income of Rs. 19,53,004. 7. In the course of assessment proceedings, AO issued notices under ss. 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act on 28th July, 2008 along with a letter calling for information and clarification on various points noticed by him on the scrutiny of the return of income filed and the seized material. On the basis of a detailed verification exercise carried out by the AO and the replies of the assessee furnished time to time in the assessment proceedings, the AO has proceeded to determine the total income. The AO noticed that assessee was deriving income from transportation business which was declared in terms of s. 44AE of the Act, commission and C&F agency income and rental incomes. The assessee was found to have neither maintained any books of account nor furnished year-wise balance sheet or P&L a/c with the returns of income filed originally or subsequent to search. The AO also recorded a statement of the assessee in the course of the assessme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om the residential premises of the assessee whose statement was also recorded during the assessment proceedings. On the basis of the said seized material, AO has concluded that assessee had made payments of Rs. 33,50,000 during -the year under consideration and Rs. 18,50,000 during the next asst. yr. 2004-05 towards investment in shops in the scheme of Viraj Corner which was not declared in the returns filed. Assessee not only resisted the addition, but also canvassed that the investment was explainable on the basis of cash-flow statement prepared. The AO has rejected the cash-flow statement and the aforesaid investment was also treated as unexplained investment under s. 69 of the Act. Since the share of the assessee was 50 per cent, the investment to the extent of Rs. 16,75,000 in shops in the scheme of Viraj Corner was assessed as unexplained investment under s. 69 of the Act in the hands of the assessee for asst. yr. 2003-04. 11. The third addition of Rs. 11,05,000 has been on the basis of seized material styled as A-48 representing investments in acquisition of shop at Image Plaza. In this context also, AO inferred that assessee group had paid a total amount of Rs. 31,60,000....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,68,74,825. Thus, consequent to the order of the CIT(A) the total income of the assessee has been determined at Rs. 3,00,04,825 as against Rs. 52,93,000 determined by the AO. 16. In this background, the assessee is in appeal before us challenging the order of the CIT(A) firstly, with respect to the additions sustained by him which were originally made by the AO under s. 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investments in shops and plot; secondly, with respect to the action of the CIT(A) in enhancing the income by Rs. 2,68,74,825 representing income from moneylending business; and thirdly, with respect to the action of CIT(A) in rejecting assessee's plea of availability of cash equivalent to the depreciation claimed on assets in the cash-flow statements furnished by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. 17. In this background, the rival counsel have made their submissions. The learned counsel for the assessee has furnished voluminous paper books and also written synopsis with regard to the issues raised in appeal. The learned Departmental Representative has also furnished paper books, inter alia, containing a note of the AO dt. 21st Aug., 2013 with respect to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Thus, assessee partly succeeds on ground of appeal No. 2." 19. The second and most pertinent issue which has been raised by the Assessee is challenge to the action of the CIT(A) enhancing the assessment by a sum of Rs. 2,68,74,825 representing income from moneylending business. The pertinent point raised by the assessee is that the power of the CIT(A) to enhance the assessment does not entail finding of a new source of income and therefore the addition of Rs. 2,68,74,825 made by the CIT(A) on account of moneylending business is not within the purview of s. 251(1)(a) of the Act. The plea of the assessee is that the action of the CIT(A) in invoking s. 251(1)(a) of the Act to enhance the total assessed income by adding the income from moneylending activities, is beyond the jurisdiction and power vested under s. 251(l)(a) of the Act. According to the assessee, the CIT(A) has erred in enhancing the income for which no source was processed by the AO and neither the same has ever been declared by the assessee either in the original returns of income or even in the returns of income filed subsequent to the search and seizure action under s. 132(1) of the Act. It has also been asserted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....47, 49, 50, 52, 53 in the assessment orders which also do not suggest that persons appearing in the diaries were examined on oath. The money involved in these coded transaction seems to be quite substantial. 6. In view of the above, you are hereby directed to examine the various persons appearing in the diaries especially the persons (V.J. Shah, Rajmohan, Jaspara, Majid Khan Nanhelal Pathan c/o Mamta Building, Devendra Paul, Mittal Builders, Purshottam Patel, Ghuge, G.S. Gujral etc.) whose names are legible quite frequent in the diaries on oath and record their statement in regard to their transactions with Bindras. Similarly, you are also directed to examine all those persons whose blank cheques were found and seized by the Department during search at Bindras on 15th March, 2007. 7. Since the matter is urgent and involves many high demand appeals, I would appreciate if your comprehensive report is sent by 30th Dec, 2011 positively." 22. per the direction of the CIT(A), the AO was required to make enquiries, including examination of some of the persons whose names were appearing in the diaries seized in the course of search. The AO was also directed to examine ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....flected truly by him and his other family member in their book of accounts." 23. The CIT(A) also examined the coded notings found in the seized material and concluded as under : "A close scrutiny of the seized books/documents leaves no room for any doubt regarding the nature of the seized papers or the nature of transactions or the genuineness of the persons reflected in the seized documents. The seized material has clearly established the nature of transactions that the appellant had with the persons mentioned in the seized pocket diaries. Apart from the principal amounts, calculation of interest and its payments has been clearly reflected against the names of the persons though in a coded manner. Opening balance, payments, interest calculation etc. have been reflected in the seized diaries. In view of the facts and circumstantial evidence as mentioned above, I have no doubts whatsoever that the transactions reflected in the seized documents are genuine and true but outside the regular books of account of the appellant. The explanation of the appellant in regard to the nature of transactions is found to be untrue and hence not acceptable." 24. Ultimately, the CIT(A)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts of the addition of Rs. 2,68,74,825 made by the CIT(A) with regard to the income from moneylending business. The preliminarily aspect in question before us is as to whether the CIT(A) had jurisdiction to enhance income by a sum of Rs. 2,68,74,825 in terms of s. 251 of the Act. Factually speaking, it is not in dispute that so far as the returns of income filed by the assessee originally under s. 139 of the Act or the returns of income filed in pursuance to the notices issued under s. 153A(l)(a) of the Act are concerned, there is no declaration of any activity of moneylending much less declaration of income from such an activity. Further, in the regular assessments as well as in the impugned assessments carried out under s. 153A(l)(b) of the Act consequent to search action the AO has neither processed any activity of moneylending nor assessed any income thereof. Undisputedly, there is nothing on record to suggest that assessee admitted to carrying on of any moneylending activity. Thus, a factual premise can be safely reached to the effect that in the present case, CIT(A) has discovered a new source of income while invoking his power of enhancement contained in s. 251(l)(a) of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....noted with approval by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891. The issue in the case of Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry (supra) also related to the power of the AAC under s. 31(3) of erstwhile Act of 1922. In this case, the AAC, in an appeal filed by the assessee, considered an item of Rs. 40,000 which was not considered by the ITO and the same was added as income from undisclosed sources. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the AAC exceeded his jurisdiction provided in s. 31(3) of erstwhile Act of 1922 as he had no power to enhance assessment by discovering new sources of income not mentioned in the record i.e. the return filed by the assessee and the assessment order passed by the ITO. Similar view was expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 which also related to power of enhancement contained'in s. 31(3) of erstwhile Act of 1922. In the case of Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria (supra), it was held that power of enhancement under s. 31(3) of erstwhile Act of 1922 was restricted to the subject-matter of assessment or the source of incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat has been held therein by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and also the manner in which the said judgment has been understood and explained subsequently by the Courts. In the case of Nirbheram Daluram (supra), in the course of reassessment proceedings, the ITO noted certain 12 entries relating to Hundi loans, which were not considered genuine and thus assessed the amount of Rs. 2,45,000 as 'undisclosed income' by working out the 'peak credit'. In appeal preferred by the assessee, the AAC on a scrutiny of the cash book, discovered 10 more bogus entries totalling Rs. 2,30,000 and added the same as 'income from undisclosed sources'. In appeal preferred by the assessee before the Tribunal, it was held that the AAC had no jurisdiction to enhance the income by-making addition of Rs. 2,30,000 as income from undisclosed sources when these sources were not considered at all by the ITO. The Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court vide its judgment in CIT v. Nirbheram Daluram (supra) affirmed the order of the Tribunal by observing that the items constituted new sources of income which were not the subject-matter of assessment before the ITO and therefore it was not open ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to a matter raised by the assessee in appeal but also with regard to any other matter which has been considered by the AO and determined in the course of assessment. However, there is a solitary but significant limitation to the power of revisions, viz. that it is not open to the AAC to introduce in the assessment a new source of income and the assessment has to be confined to those terms of income which were the subject-matter of original assessment." (Emphasis supplied) 32. Accordingly, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court reiterated that there was a significant limitation to the power of enhancement referred to in s. 251 of the Act whereby it is not open to an appellate authority to introduce in the assessment a new source of income and, that the assessment has to be confined to those items of income which were the subject-matter of original assessment. Similarly, the Full Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sardari Lal & Co. (supra) also considered a similar argument that is canvassed before us by the learned CIT Departmental Representative on behalf of the Revenue, based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nirbheram Daluram (supr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e find no reasons to uphold the plea of the learned CIT-Departriiehtal Representative. 35. Apart from the aforesaid reason, we may also point out as to how the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nirbheram Dalwam (supra) does not require consideration in the present case. As we have noted earlier while considering the factual aspects in the case of Nirbherarm Daluram (supra), the AO considered certain Hundi loan entries as unexplained and assessed peak credit of Rs. 2,45,000 as an undisclosed income. The AAC in appeal on scrutiny of cash book discovered 10 more bogus entries totalling to Rs. 2,30,000 and added the same as income from undisclosed sources. Factually speaking, income sought to be taxed by the AO as well as the AAC was from the same source, i.e. undisclosed income from unexplained Hundi loan entries, and therefore, the AAC could not be considered to have discovered a new source of income. Whereas, in the present case it is factually evident that the CIT(A) has discovered a new source of income, i.e. moneylending activity, which was not existing on record i.e. neither in the assessment order nor in the returns of income filed by the assessee. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the following additions made by the AO under s. 69 of the Act rejecting the cash flow statement submitted properly explaining the source available for such investment: (a) Addition of Rs. 16,75,000 for investment in the scheme of Viraj Corner (ground No. 2). (b) Addition in the scheme of Image Plaza of Rs. 11,05,000 (ground No. 3). (c) Addition of Rs. 3,00,000 plot No. 18 Ghuje (ground No. 4). The source for the investments having properly explained the additions made under s. 69 are unwarranted and be quashed." 39. On -all these aspects, point made by the assessee is that the CIT(A) was not justified in affirming the action of the AO because the sources for the aforesaid investments were properly explained on the basis of the cash flow statements. With regard to the investment in the scheme of Viraj Corner, AO examined the notings in the diary seized during search, namely, Annex. A-48 of the seized material and concluded that assessee had made total payments of Rs. 52,00,000 during the period relevant to the asst. yrs. 2003-04 and 2004-05. On the other hand, the plea of the assessee was that only a sum ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2004-05 and thus only a sum of Rs. 25,55,000 was to be treated as unexplained investment for asst. yrs. -2003-04 and 2004-05. However, it is pointed out that the addition made by the AO on this count in three assessment years of 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 in the hands of the assessee and other two family members, namely, Shri D.A. Bindra and Shri M.D. Bindra totals upto Rs. 39,85,000, which is even more than the total investment in the property accepted by the Revenue. This aspect of the matter, in our view, deserves to be considered by the AO. If the AO finds that the addition has been doubly made he should allow appropriate relief. In the result, the AO is directed to rework the total income for the year under consideration keeping in mind the aforesaid directions. Needless to say, the AO shall allow the assessee an opportunity of being heard and then decide as per law. Thus, on this ground assessee partly succeeds. 42. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 887/Pn/2013 for asst. year 2003-04 is partly allowed. 43. Now, we take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 873/Pn/2013 for asst. yr. 2002-03 in the case of Jagdishsingh Amritsingh Bindra, which is dire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pted as explained. The enhancement be quashed. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the inference drawn by learned CIT(A) that I find from my long experience in the Department that every paper seized during the course of search is claimed to be 'dumb' paper with no utility or importance whatsoever for assessee. I do not think assessee keeps on accumulating trash. It is again a fact that assessee will never admit the transactions mentioned in the seized paper unless cornered by AO while it is for the assessee to brand every seized paper as 'dumb' for his benefit, it is the responsibility of the AO concerned to apply mind and put efforts to decodify the coded transactions determining the correct taxable income of the appellant'. The enhancement therefore is on the basis of the personal inferences drawn by learned CIT(A) which are not permissible in law. The enhancement be quashed. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in making reference to his appeal orders pertaining to asst. yr. 2003-04 to the undisclosed income of the assessee the sources of which were never processed by the AO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be a part of the notings in the diary, therefore according to the AO the entire payments of Rs. 81.50 lacs appearing in the seized diary remained unexplained. Thus, AO submitted in the remand report that the assessee be assessed to an income of Rs. 81.50 lacs on the basis of p. 4 (backside)/5 of Annex. 48 of the seized material. The CIT(A) has considered the remand report and added a sum of Rs. 38.25 lacs (1/2 of Rs. 76.50 lacs) on the basis of transaction recorded at p. 4 (backside)/5 of Annex. 48, and the balance 1/2 share has been added in the hands of assessee's brother, Shri D.A. Bindra. Against the aforesaid, assessee is in appeal before us. 47. Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the enhancement was not justified in as much as entire addition is based on the statement of one Shri Rajeev Manohar Karambelkar who was not allowed to be cross-examined by the assessee. The learned counsel pointed out that course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was examined with reference to the seized material in question and the AO was satisfied with the explanation furnished, and no addition was made. At the time of hearing, learned counsel submitte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 81.5 lacs be assessed to income whereas the CIT(A) has considered only an income of Rs. 76.5 lacs on the basis of notings in the diary. Due to the aforesaid inconsistencies, coupled with the fact that the said Shri Rajeev Karambelkar was not subject to any cross-examination by the assessee, the conclusion of unexplained investments having been made by the assessee is unsustainable. Pertinently, it may also be noted that insofar as the notings in the seized material relating to projects Swamy Panchavati, Panchavati Kalantri are concerned, the assessee and Shri Rajeev Karambelkar were convergent in their respective statements that no payments were made by the assessee. The aforesaid aspect of the matter has also been glossed over by the lower authorities. Considering the entirety of the circumstances, we find ample weight in the plea of the assessee to set aside the matter to the file of the AO for proper enquiries and ascertainment of the nature of the transactions in question. Furthermore, even if, any addition is sustainable on this point, the same is to be computed having regard to the availability of the sources for such investments determined on the basis of the cashflow s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l are identical to the issues decided by us in the case of Jagdishsingh Amritsingh Bindra for asst. yr. 2003-04 vide ITA No. 887/Pn/2013 in the earlier paras. The AO is directed to rework/recompute the total income accordingly. 56. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 57. ITA No. 874/Pn/2013 is an appeal by the assessee directed against an order of the CIT(A)-II, Nashik dt. 8th March, 2013 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dt. 24th Dec, 2008 passed by the AO, under s. 153A r/w s. 143(3) of the Act, pertaining to the asst. yr. 2006-07. 58. In this appeal, the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 raised by the Assessee are with regard to additions of Rs. 1,20,790 and Rs. 1,71,760 made by the AO as undisclosed income under s. 69 of the Act. The only plea of the assessee is that the action of the AO amounts to double additions, as the assessee had suo motu included such sums in the income declared in the return of income filed under s. 153A of the Act on account of "errors and omission" basis. 59. After considering the rival stands, we deem it fit and proper to restore the matter back to the file of the AO who shall examine the plea of the assessee and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Nashik dt. 19th March, 2013 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dt. 24th Dec, 2008 passed by the AO, under s. 153A r/w s. 143(3) of the Act, pertaining to the asst. yr. 2002-03. 65. It was a common point between the parties that issues raised in this appeal are identical to the issues decided by us in the case of Jagdishsingh Amritsingh Bindra for asst. yr. 2002-03 vide ITA No. 873/Pn/2013 in the earlier para. The AO is directed to rework/recompute the total income accordingly. 66. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 67. ITA No. 870/Pn/2013 is an appeal by the assessee directed against an order of the CIT(A)-II, Nashik dt. 11th March, 2013 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dt. 24th Dec, 2008 passed by the AO, under s. 153A r/w s. 143(3) of the Act, pertaining to the asst. yr. 2006-07. 68. It was a common point between the parties that issues raised in this appeal are identical to the issues decided by us in the case of Jagdishsingh Amritsingh Bindra for asst. yr. 2006-07 vide ITA No. 874/Pn/2013 in the earlier paras. The AO is directed to rework/recompute the total income accordingly. 69. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the cash found inter alia included an amount of Rs. 40,00,000 received from M/s Jaspara Construction against sale of immovable property. The said position was reiterated by Shri J.A. Bindra again in the course of the assessment proceedings in a statement recorded on 20th Oct., 2008, which was not accepted by the AO. In this background, the CIT(A) required the AO to examine the issue of the availability of cash of Rs. 40,00,000 from M/s Jaspara Construction. The AO submitted his remand report in which he has referred to the enquiries conducted from M/s Jaspara Builders, whereby payment of Rs. 40,00,000 in cash to the assessee stood confirmed. In terms of such affirmative report of the AO, CIT(A) recognized availability of cash of Rs. 10,00,000 in the hands of the assessee (i.e. l/4th of Rs. 40,00,000) and accordingly found no justification for sustaining the addition of Rs. 8,00,000 on account of unexplained cash, and deleted the same. Before us, there is no material on record to distract from the above finding of the CIT(A), which is based on a remand report of the AO affirming the availability of cash of Rs. 10,00,000 in the hands of the assessee. In the absence of any credible o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. yr. 2007-08 on the basis of which the present addition has been deleted by the CIT(A). Therefore, we find no merit in the present ground of appeal preferred by the Revenue, which is hereby dismissed. 79. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 80. ITA No. 1043/Pn/2012 and ITA No. 1049/Pn/2012 are cross-appeals by the Revenue and the assessee respectively, which are directed against an order of the CIT(A)-II, Nashik dt. 24th March, 2012 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dt. 24th Dec, 2008 passed by the AO under s. 143(3) of the Act, pertaining to the asst. yr. 2007-08. 81. In appeal of the assessee, the ground of appeal No. 1 reads as under : "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the rejection of the claim of depreciation in cash flow. The claim of depreciation being notional outgo of cash always represents with the assessee as cash available in hand. The learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the rejecting the claim of availability of cash in hand. It be held accordingly." 82. On this ground issue relates to the plea of the assessee that while considering th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....013 dt. 29th Aug., 2013 in favour of Revenue. In the said decision after considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Dr. K.M. Mehbooba v. Dy. CIT [2012] 211 Taxman 52 and the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akbani Salim Abdul Gaffar v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal No. 873 (Pn) of 2008, dated 31-8-2012] it was held as under : "On perusal of the impugned assessment orders, it is seen that the AO has considered the income offered by the assessee during the course of search and seizure proceedings as well as the cash and jewellery found and seized. Moreover, said assessment has been completed within time specified under s. 153B(l)(b) i.e. within period of two years from end of financial year in which search has taken place. Hence, otherwise also there is compliance of the mandatory condition in completing the assessment as provided under s. 153B(l)(b) of the Act. We accordingly hold that there is no merit in the grounds taken by the assessee in asst. yr. 2007-08 and respective ground is dismissed." 85. Following the aforesaid precedent which is rendered in the case of one of the family members of the assessee under identical ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6. Therefore, the two cross-grounds are being taken up together for adjudication. 90. As against jewellery of 2,100.5 gms. treated as unexplained by the AO, the CIT (A) noticed purchase of jewellery during various assessment years as tabulated by him in para 11 of the impugned order and according to him, purchase of jewellery weighing 873.50 gms. was supported by documentary evidence and duly reflected in the records. Considering the status of the assessee and also the presence of Stridhan with assessee's wife and considering the CBDT circular, the CIT(A) proceeded to consider another 600 gms. of jewellery as explained. Therefore, the balance of jewellery weighing 627.45 gms. was held unexplained and accordingly the total addition was reduced to Rs. 5,87,606 from an amount of Rs. 19,67,119 made by the AO. 91. The only point raised by the assessee, and which was not accepted by the CIT (A) is the availability of ancestral jewellery weighing 2,527 gms. The stand of the CIT(A) and also the Revenue before us is to the effect that there is no documentary evidence to support the availability of ancestral jewellery with the assessee. In the course of hearing, the learned Departm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nhancing the income to Rs. 10,52,000 as against addition of Rs. 1,52,000 made by the AO invoking the provisions of s. 251 of the Act. It simply amounts to change of opinion and without any evidence available in support of such action of enhancement under s. 251 of the Act. The enhancement be quashed which has been so made without considering the merits and also by rejecting the cash flow statement submitted." 97. With respect to the aforesaid grounds of appeal, the only issue relates to the plea of the assessee that while considering the availability of cash for explaining the investments/outgoings, the depreciation allowance being a non-cash expenditure, be considered to be available in hand to the assessee in the cash-flow statement prepared and furnished during the assessment proceedings. Similar issue has been considered by us in ITA No. 887/Pn/2012 (vide para 18 of this order), whereby the AO has been directed to consider and apply the order of the Tribunal dt. 29th Aug., 2013 (supra) in this regard. Hereinabove also, the AO is directed accordingly. Thus, on this ground assessee partly succeeds. 98. In the cross-appeal of the Revenue, the issues raised by the Revenue rel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aras in-ITA No. 1043/Pn/2012 in the case of Shri Amritsingh Jagatsingh Bindra in relation to the asst. yr. 2007-08. Following the said precedent, the said grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 are dismissed. 106. The only other issue in this appeal raised by the assessee is with regard to the addition of Rs. 2,44,043 sustained by the CIT(A) out of the total addition of Rs. 4,21,547 made by the AO on account of unexplained investment in jewellery. 107. At the time of hearing, the only plea raised by the assessee was that the unexplained investment in jewellery has been wrongly computed by the AO by noting only the jewellery in the hands of the assessee, her husband and her children whereas the correct course should have been to include the total jewellery available in the hands of parents-in-law also i.e. Shri D.A. Bindra and Smt. P.D. Bindra, so as to consider the availability of jewellery on 'family' level. 108. In our considered opinion, the aforesaid plea of the assessee is not justified due to the fact that before the CIT(A), assessee pointed out that the jewellery in question was found in her cupboard and was claimed as part of Stridhan. The plea of the assessee woul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee is dismissed and the addition of Rs. 14,79,534 sustained by the CIT(A) is hereby affirmed. 114.In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 115. ITA No. 28/Pn/2013 is an appeal by the assessee directed against an order of the CIT(A)-II, Nashik dt. 30th Nov., 2012 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dt. 24th Dec, 2008 passed by the AO under s. 143(3) of the Act, pertaining to the asst. yr. 2007-08. 116. In this appeal, the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 are similar to the grounds of appeal Nos. 2, 3, and 4 considered by us in the earlier paras in ITA No. 1043/Pn/2012 in the case of Shri Amritsingh Jagatsingh Bindra in relation to the asst. yr. 2007-08. Following the precedent, the said grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 are dismissed. 117. All the other issues in this appeal are similar to those considered by us in the earlier paras in ITA No. 27/Pn/2013 in the case of Kamaljitkaur Rajpalsingh Bindra in relation to the asst. yr. 2007-08. Following the same the remaining grounds of appeal are accordingly disposed of. 118. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 119. ITA No. 526/Pn/2013 is an appeal by the assessee dire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd 2004-05. 126. The only plea raised by the assessee in both the appeals is that the additions of Rs. 1,50,000 and Rs. 1,75,000 on account of unexplained investment respectively made by the CIT(A) be considered to have been explained on the basis of sources of cash available as per revised cash-flow statement following the decision of the Tribunal dt. 29th Aug., 2013 (supra). The AO is directed to recompute the income of the assessee on the basis of the directions contained in the order of the Tribunal dt. 29th Aug., 2013 (supra). Thus, assessee partly succeeds on this count. 127. In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed. 128. ITA No. 336/Pn/2013 and ITA No. 444/Pn/2013 are cross-appeals by the assessee and the Revenue respectively directed against an order of the CIT(A)-II, Nashik dt. 13th Dec, 2012 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dt. 24th Dec, 2008 passed by the AO under s. 143(3) of the Act, pertaining to the asst. yr. 2007-08. 129. In appeal of the assessee, the ground of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 are same as grounds of appeal Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in the case of Shri Amritsingh Jagatsingh Bindra in ITA No. 1043/Pn/2012 for asst. yr. 2007-08 dealt ....