TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 1400
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng and providing proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee since the CIT(A) vide order dated 02-01-2012 had dismissed the appeals for non prosecution. 2.1 In this case, notice of hearing was sent on 27-08-2015 fixing the date of hearing on 15-10-2015. Since nobody appeared on that date notice was sent by RPAD fixing the date of hearing on 12-01- 2016. Although the notice was duly served on the assessee (acknowledgement placed on record) nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any petition seeking adjournment of the case was filed. Therefore, these appeals are being disposed of after considering the material available on record and after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative. ITA No.1302/PN/2014 (A.Y. 2002-03) : 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and running a petrol pump besides dealing in lubricants. Earlier he was one of the partners of M/s. K.R. Boob & Sons (running a petrol pump) which has since been dissolved and the assessee has become the proprietor. A search and seizure action u/s.132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted in the case of one Shri Shriram Hiralal Soni, 1168, Ravivar Peth Pune and his brother. During th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....smissed the appeal filed by the assessee by observing as under : "6. I have carefully gone through the assessment order, orders of the Hon'ble ITAT and CIT(A) and submissions of the appellant and the copies of the relevant documents found and seized from the premises of Shri Shriram H. Soni during search on 29-07-2003. The appellant in his additional grounds of appeal has questioned the validity of issuing notice u/s.153C of the Act. The appellant in his lengthy submission has referred to various points such as delay in issue of notice u/s 153C, issue of notice to individual and recording of the satisfaction note, etc. I find from the record that two undated cheques of Rs. 5 lacs each drawn on Indian Bank A/c No.367 issued by M/s. K.R. Boob and Sons, signed by Shri Pradeep Kisanlal Boob as its partner and four blank promissory notes signed by Shri Pradeep K. Boob as a partner of M/s. K.R. Boob and Sons (two each of Rs. 5 lacs and 2 each of Rs. 5000/-) were seized from the premises of Mr. Soni. During the course of assessment proceedings, statement of Shri Pradeep Kisanlal Boob was recorded and he was confronted with the said cheques and promissory notes. Shri Pradip Kisanlal Boob....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rds merit of the case, the appellant has stated that though blank cheques were given and blank promissory cheques were signed, loan transaction did not materialize. Hence, the AO was not justified in making addition on account of cheques and brokerage during the assessment years under appeal. A perusal of the copies of the seized material furnished by the appellant proves otherwise. Check list prepared by Mr. Soni for the period 01/09/2001 to 31/12/2002 shows the appellant as a borrower of Rs. 10 lacs for a period of 90 months at interest rate of 1.50% and brokerage of 0.25%. One "Shri S.K." is shown as investor against the name of the appellant. Mr. Soni's document clearly writes BOOB (NSK) as the name of the borrower. Further; the document dated 12/08/2001 seized from Mr. Soni shows Mr. BOOB(NSK) as borrower with code 76 and A/c B048. Appellant is shown as debtor under the main head and borrower under the sub head. Page 253 dated 30/06/2001 of Annexure A shows advance of Rs. 9,47,500/- against the name of "Boobji Nashik". All these documents establish beyond doubt that the appellant had infact taken a loan of Rs. 10 lacs through Mr. Soni at interest rate of 1.5% with the brok....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....before him about the requirement of section 153C about recording of satisfaction note by the AO of Shri Shriram H. Soni of Pune. (6) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in overlooking the finding given in a decision dated 29/01/2013 of the jurisdictional Bench ITAT Pune in the case of ITA vs. Smt Push palata A. Loya in ITA No. 785 to 787/PN/2011. (7) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in coming to a conclusion that the words 'Boob Nsk', written in the seized documents of Shri Shriram H. Soni of Pune, refer to the appellant without there being any corroborative evidence. (8) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the remarks in the decisions of Himalaya Distributors vs. ITO (2009) 125 TTJ (Pune) 705 : (2009) 29 DTR 267 and of Meghmani Organics Ltd. (2010) 129 TTJ (Ahd) 255 and Smt. Godavari Devi Agrawal vs. JCIT (2005) 95 TTJ (Nag) 720. (9) The appellant craze leave to amend, alter, add or delete any ground of appeal." 8. Identical grounds have been taken for A.Yrs. 2003-04 and 2004-05. 9. We ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and brokerage during the assessment years under appeal. A perusal of the copies of the seized material furnished by the appellant proves otherwise. Check list prepared by Mr. Soni for the period 01-09- 2001 to 31-12-2002 shows that the appellant as a borrower of Rs. 10 lacs for a period of 90 months at interest rate of 1.50% and brokerage of 0.25%. One "Shri S.K." is shown as investor against the name of the appellant. Mr. Soni's document cleraely write BOOB (NSK) as the name of the borrower. Further, the document dated 12-08-2001 seized from Mr. Soni shows Mr. BOOB (NSK) as borrower with code 76 and A/c.B048. Appellant is shown as debtor under the main head and borrower under the sub head. Page 253 dated 30-06-2001 of Annexure A shows advance of Rs. 9,47,500/- against the name of "Boobji Nashik". All these documents establish beyond doubt that the appellant had infact taken a loan of Rs. 10 lacs through Mr. Soni at interest rate of 1.5% with the brokerage of 0.25%. Hence appellant's contention that transaction did not materialize is devoid of fact and merit. The appellant has also failed to prove any satisfactory explanation as to why these documents were still kept with Mr. Soni ....