AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 1193
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 2004-05 with reference to the provisions of second proviso of sub section (1) of section 153C of the Act. The impugned assessment proceedings became barred by limitation as on 31.12.2006 and the assessment order dated 29.11.2013, therefore, requires to be quashed. 1.2 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law in holding that the extant law on 16.05.2013 (the date on which the AO started the reassessment proceedings) is applicable and in rejecting the appellant's submission that the law prevailing on 31.12.2006 was applicable as far as limitation period for assessment year 2004-05 is concerned. 2.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding an addition of Rs. 3,33,13,300/- made by the AO under section 69C of the Act on account of alleged unaccounted contributions made by the appellant to Uttar Pradesh Distillers Association (UPDA) in Financial Year 2003-04 solely on the basis of the statement of Shri R.K. Miglani recorded on 14.02.2006 at the back of the appellant and without allowing an opportunity to the appellant to cross examine Shri R.K. Miglani although a sp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h are as under: "Ground of Appeal No. 1 is directed against the legality of the impugned assessment order on the ground that it is barred by limitation and, therefore, requires to be quashed. The appellant had sought my advice in this matter and a copy of my written opinion dated 07.06.2013 was filed before the learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 8(1). New Delhi (hereinafter called AO for short) and has also been filed in the statement of facts annexed to Form No. 35. It is submitted that the reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2004-05 stood time barred by limitation on 31.12.2006 because as on 31.12.2006 the provisions of Section 153A(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act for short) were not in the statute of books. The provisions of Section 153A(2) of the Act were introduced only by Finance Act, 2008 w.e.f. 01.06.2003. It is submitted that it is trite law that the legislature does not intend to attribute to the amended provisions a greater retrospectivity than expressly mentioned nor does it authorize the Assessing Officer to commence proceedings which before the new law came into force had become time barred. If any authority is needed for this eleme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1961 were not in the statute of books. The provisions of section 153A(2) of the Act were introduced only by Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 01.06.2003. The appellant has argued that the legislature does not intend to attribute to the amended provisions a greater retrospectively than expressly mentioned nor does it authorize the AO to commence proceedings which before the amendment had already become time barred. The appellant has relied upon the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S.S. Gadgil Vs. Lai & Co. (supra) and K.M. Sharma vs. ITO (supra). 7.2. I have considered the facts of the case as well as the submissions made by the appellant on the issue. It is observed that the assessment proceedings for the year under consideration u/s 143(3) were already in progress when a search and seizure operation took place in the related case consequent to which proceedings u/s 153C of the Act were initiated in the appellant's case. As per the second proviso to section 153A of the Act, the pending assessment proceedings were abated. For the better appreciation of the facts the second proviso to section 153 A of the Act is reproduced as under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive such proceedings. To my view, the appellant's argument is misplaced. It is true that in appellant's case normal assessment for AY 2004-05 should have been completed by 31.12.2006 but here is a case where the AO had to abate the original assessment proceedings due to search operation in the appellant's related cases. Thus, the original assessment proceedings which were pending remained suspended unrelated to the merits of the case. As the arrangement of provisions in the Act provides such suspension of proceedings as justified since the AO is empowered to make all possible additions in assessment u/s 153C of the Act what he could have done in normal assessment proceedings. In addition to it, the AO is empowered to make additions based on seized/requisitioned assets or books of accounts, documents etc. which would not be done in normal assessment proceedings. It is in that sense the proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act were merged and replaced by proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. Since the matter remained live in the shape of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act till the new amendment through Finance Act, 2008 was introduced w.e.f. 01.06.2003 retrospectively, it cannot be concl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... through UPDA for their ulterior motive to gain the benefits. 13. Search and Seizure Operation under section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was carried out at the residential premises of Mr. R.K. Miglani, General Secretary of UPDA on 14.02.2006 as well as at the premises of M/s Radico Khaitan (a leading distiller of Uttar Pradesh based company) Many incriminating documents were seized during search operation from both the places. Statements of various persons including Shri Miglani were recorded u/s 134(4)/133A of the I.T. Act, 1961. The documents so seized from Mr. Miglani's residence, General Secretary of M/s UPDA were regular accounts of money received date wise from the member distilleries during the financial year 2003-04 to 2005-06 (till 14.02.2006) represent the contribution by each-member Distillery on the basis of their production of country liquor. As per the statement of Mr. Miglani, the money so collected by the UPDA from its member Distillery on regular basis was given / distributed to various officials and politicians which basically represented illegal payments. This whole process/activity was coordinated through select committee known as "Core Committee" and Shri Migl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....04, 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07." 15. After examination of the seized material and after giving an opportunity of being heard, the Assessing Officer taxed an amount of Rs. 3,33,13,300/- u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ld. CIT (A) confirmed the addition. 16. Before us, during the arguments the ld. AR argued that this matter stands covered by the orders of the Tribunal in the related cases. We brought to our notice the page no. 81 & 82 of the order of the ITAT in ITA No.2678 & 2679/Del/2011 wherein the relevant issues have been discussed at page nos. 36 to 58. 17. During the arguments before us, the ld. DR argued extensively about the order of the Hon'ble High Court, regarding the seized material, non-consideration of seized material during the earlier proceedings, the order of the ITAT in the case of Mohan Meakins Ltd. in ITA No. 3787/Del/2008, findings in case of proceedings u/s 12AA in case of UPDA. The submissions of the ld. DR is as under: "A search and seizure action was conducted on 14.02.2006 at the residence of Sh R. K. Miglani, General Secretary UPDA, from where various incriminating documents were seized vide Annexure A-1 to A-10. The search war....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igh Court vide order dated 22.01.2015 held as follows: "5. The Revenue urges that the AO and the CIT(A) took note of not merely the document which listed out the payments made in a tabular form for different purposes, but also other documents and materials in the form of production figures, the statement of Mr. R.K. Miglani, and the circumstance that the production figures coincide with the figures available with the Revenue in the pending proceedings. It appears that the Tribunal has not rendered any specific findings on the status of such documents. For instance, if the production figures were in fact forwarded by the concerned unit under a letter or some other form connecting it with the material form seized, inference would be of particular kind. (iv) The directions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court have not been followed in the subsequent consequential order of ITAT. Hon'ble Delhi High Court had specifically directed to give specific findings on the status of such documents which has not been done. In Para 6.4 of the Assessment order, the AO has pointed out how production figures of assessee's books have been found to match with seized material at R.K. Mig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve issues have been decided by Hon'ble ITAT and affirmed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court, these issues cannot now be revisited in these proceedings. E. EVERY POSSIBLE EFFORT WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO ALLOW CROSS EXAMINATION OF SH. R.K.MIGLANI Detailed discussion given below F. Strong Reliance upon the statement on oath of Sh. R.K.Miglani recorded u/s 132(4) on the date of search. With regard to evidentiary value of statement recorded u/s 132(4) reliance is placed upon following judgments: (i) Kishore Kumar Vs CIT (62 taxmann.com 215, 234 Taxman 771) (Copy Enclosed) B Kishore Kumar Vs CIT (52 taxmann.com 449) Madras High Court confirmed (Copy Enclosed) (ii) Bhagirath Aggarwal Vs CIT (31 taxmann.com 274, 215 Taxman 229, 351 ITR 143) (Copy Enclosed) (iii) CIT Vs M. S. Aggarwal [2018] 93 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (iv) Smt Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) (v) M/s Pebble Investment and Finance Ltd Vs ITO (2017-TIOL-238-SC-IT) (Copy Enclosed) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The above conclusion was arrived at primarily by relying upon decision of Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore in the case of DCIT Vs United Spirits Limited (ITA NO. 1375 to 1378/Bang/2010) It may be pointed out that in the entire above order of Hon'ble ITAT, there was mention of seized papers annexure A-1 to A-10 which were produced at the time of hearing. However, there was no examination of entries in these seized papers. What was examined was whether these seized documents belong to the assessee or not. 1. Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide order dated 22.01.2015 held as follows: "5. The Revenue urges that the AO and the CIT(A) took note of not merely the document which listed out the payments made in a tabular form for different purposes, but also other documents and materials in the form of production figures, the statement of Mr. R.K. Miglani, and the circumstance that the production figures coincide with the figures available with the Revenue in the pending proceedings. It appears that the Tribunal has not rendered any specific findings on the status of such documents. For instance, if the production figures were in fact forwarded by the concerned unit under a lett....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....generated sheets in which details of production of country liquor by individual distilleries and contribution to UPDA by each member and basis of calculation 10 Annexure B Pg 65-75 Specimen copies of weekly records maintained 10 Annexure B Pg 22 A-3, Page 81 Total country Liquor produced by each distillery, then converted into no. of cases. Contribution by each distillery is calculated @ Rs. 20 per case (Total Rs. 36,94,410) 10 Annexure-B Pg 14 A-2, Page 69 "All Account April 2005 to January 2006". This is detailed account of money due from each distillery and received in each month. 11 Annexure B Pg-24,25 A-3,Page 78 "Distribution of 4.5 crore". In this, name of distillery, actual supply by 11 each distillery, amount to be collected and amount received Annexure B Pg 30 &31 Detail calculation sheets for F.Y. 2003-04 and 2004-05 giving details of dispatch schedule of each distillery and amount to be collected from 11 Annexure B Pg 51 Detailed account of Modi Distillery as on 23.04.2004 11 Annexure B Pg 2 A-1,Page 123 Money received from members fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....only Annexures A-1 to A-10 found from the premises of Shri Miglani, which was already on record before the ITAT, a specific query, was raised by the Bench to the learned CIT DR, that apart from the aforesaid, whether there is any other document which has been made the basis of recording of the satisfaction note and also the addition made in the order of assessment, and learned CIT DR has submitted that apart from the aforesaid, there are no other documents which had been made the basis of initiation of the proceedings as well as for making the addition. He was also asked to show any such document seized from the premises of searched persons, which could suggest that any production figure was forwarded by assessee "as was contended by Revenue before Hon'ble High Court". In response, the learned CIT DR placed reliance on the seized annexures A-1 to A-10, found from the residential premises of Sh. R.K. Migalni during the course of search on 14.02.2006 and referred to various pages of seized annexures. However, nowhere, the learned CIT DR has been able to show any such document, which could suggest that any document showing production figures was in fact forwarded by the assessee t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be said to be invalid on a hyper technical ground by interpreting the expression "belonging to" too literally. In view of the above facts, it would amount to going against decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court if the assessments are again quashed on the ground that annexure A-1 to A-10 do not belong to the assessee. FINDINGS IN THE CASE OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 12AA IN THE CASE OF UPDA: 1. The CIT-III, New Delhi vide order dated 16.11.2009 passed order u/s 12AA of IT Act & cancelled registration granted to the assessee. The cancellation of registration u/s 12AA was upheld by ITAT vide order in ITA No 118/Del/2010 dated 14.02.2017. The relevant findings of Hon'ble ITAT are reproduced below: "9. Now we'll have to see whether Mr Miglani has anything personal in doing all these things. Is an admitted fact that he is the Secretary General of the assessee association during relevant period. The statement of Mr Miglani clearly establishes that all the transactions covered by the documents which are confronted to him are in pursuance of the interest of the members of the assessee Association and there is nothing personal interest involved in it. In such a situ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se a statement of the Department intended to rely. At this juncture it shall not be forgotten that besides being an individual conducting his own affairs, Mr Miglani also happens to be the Secretary General of the assessee Association at relevant period. Whatever may be the capacity of Mr Miglani while making the statement u/s 132(4) of the Act, but when the assessee was required to produce its own Secretary General for the purpose of clarification as to the stand that the trust is covered by and/or is an eligible for registration u/s 12A of the Act, and when the interest of the assessee is at stake from which the assessee could have baileditself out be producing its own Secretary General before the Department to say that the transitions covered under the documents seized during the search and seizure operations were conducted in his individual capacity but not as Secretary General, there is no reason as to why the assessee is failed to do so. Further the stand taken by the assessere before the authorities is not on the lines argued before us by the Ld. AR. The ground for non-production of Secretary General of the assessee association was something different. It is not open for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the CIT is perfectly justified in recording his satisfaction that the activities of the assessee Association are neither genuine and nor are being carried out in accordance with the object of the association. (iii) The order u/s 12AA was passed cancelling registration of the assessee primarily due to the fact that the assessee was found to have made illegal payments to bureaucrats and politicians. The appeal of M/s UPDA against above ITAT order was dismissed by Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 23.10.2017 (copy enclosed) & SLP against the same was dismissed by apex court on 13.04.2018 (Copy enclosed). Since the above issues have been decided by Hon'ble ITAT and affirmed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court, these issues cannot now be revisited in these proceedings. E. CROSS EXAMINATION OF SH. R.K.MIGLANI (i) Every possible effort made to allow cross examination With regard to cross examination of Sh R.K.Miglani, as mentioned in para 4.4 of the assessment order, summons u/s 131 were issued to him on 01.03.2006, 10.08.2006, 30.11.2007, 04.08.2008 & 17.10.2008 during post search investigation as wel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed documents contains the figure of details of illicit payment made various Govt. Officer and Politicians by various members and its computation based on the quantity of dispatch received from the members of UPDA. (d) The details of illegal payment made by the member of UPDA in during the appellant to various Govt, authority were received from core Distillery by Sh. R.K. Miglani refer to Question and answer No 13 of Sh. R.K. Miglani. In view of specific dispatch data received from the member of UPDA and details of illegal payment by various members of UPDA, maintained by Shri Miglani on the basis of such dispatch figure belong to the appellant, the entry of dispatch belongs to the appellant and are part of the books of accounts of the appellant, which has been provided to UPDA for specific purposes for computing the facilitation money given to Govt, officers /politicians. These documents are for various F.Y's. maintained month wise/year wise. Therefore, these documents belong to the various members of UPDA jointly. Each members of UPDA partially owns these documents containing data of dispatch of country made liquor and computation of illicit payment mad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idavit in just one day prior to submission before CIT (c)-III during the proceeding u/s 12AA(3) this also proves that such retraction was necessitated because of threat of cancelation of registration u/s 12AA(3). Therefore on this basis also, it is afterthought. The result and further investigation in such retraction has not been submitted. (c) The appellant has filed this retraction of Sh. R.K. Miglani first time as fresh evidence and has not submitted the same in appellate proceeding in first till Hon'ble High Court. The Ld. AR has neither filed certified copy nor produced Sh. Miglani in person, therefore, this fresh evidence should not be entertained. (d) The most important aspect of retraction is that during statement, Sh. R.K. Miglani has explained the apparent contents of seized document. In retraction Statement he has not submitted the meaning of the contents of such seized documents, otherwise. (v) Findings in the case of UPDA by the AO are relevant:- Ld. AR's argument that AO in the case of UPDA has held in Para 10(b) that the seized document belong to UPDA and therefore does not belong to the members. This finding is not factual....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t discussed in the order. Undisputedly, the M/s Radico Khaitan has filed application before Settlement Commission on the basis of search conducted in its case as well as at R.K. Miglani 's premises. The only finding of search is in respect of unaccounted payment made by the members of UPDA. Therefore acceptances of additional income before Settlement Commission confirm unaccounted payment. (ix) If Hon'ble ITAT confirm, legality of the proceedings u/s 153C in appellant's case, quantification of unaccounted payment can be restored to the AO on the basis of seized document and other evidences, books of accounts impounded during survey u/s 133A in UPDA's office and statement of Sh. R.K. Miglani, if any mistakes are found in figure either in the satisfaction u/s 153C or quantification of income while passing assessment order." It is further submitted as follows: 1. During the course of assessment proceedings, details of production and dispatch figures of al l assessees was compared with the figures found recorded in the seized documents. The figures on the seized documents were found to almost tally with the figures in the books of account of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3. CIT Vs M. S. Aggarwal [2018] 93 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that where in course of block assessment proceedings, AO made addition to assessee's undisclosed income in respect of gift, in view of fact that assessee did not even know donor personally and, moreover, he himself in presence of his Chartered Accountant had made a statement under sec. 132(4) admitting that said gift was bogus, impugned addition was to be confirmed. 4. Smt Dayawanti Vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 308 (Delhi)/[2017] 245 Taxman 293 (Delhi)/[2017] 390 ITR 496 (Delhi)/[2016] 290 CTR 361 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that where inferences drawn in respect of undeclared income of assessee were premised on materials found as well as statements recorded by assessee's son in course of search operations and assessee had not been able to show as to how estimation made by Assessing Officer was arbitrary or unreasonable, additions so made by Assessing Officer by rejecting books of account was justified. 5. M/s Pebble Investment and Finance Ltd Vs ITO (2017-TIQL-238-SC-IT) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd to presumption of entries found recorded in books of account seized during search as per sections 132(4A) & 292C of I.T. Act: 1. CIT Vs Sonal Construction [2012-TIQL-851-HCDEL- IT] (Delhi) (Copy enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as follows: "the Tribunal has also held that the presumption about the genuineness and truth of the contents of the documents seized, as provided in Section 132(4A), was not available to the AO in the assessment proceedings. The judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of P. R. Met rani, no doubt held that the presumption was not available to the AO while completing the assessment and that it was limited to the prior proceedings in connection with the search. However, there was a later statutory amendment; Section 292C was introduced by the Finance Act, 2007 with retrospective effect from 1.10.1975; ++ the phrase "in any proceeding under this Act" in sub-section (1) to section 292C are important. They permit the AO to invoke the presumption that the seized documents belonged to the person searched, that the contents of the seized documents/books of accounts are true and that the signature of every ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was placed by the AO, was not sufficient for the purpose of making the additions;" 2. CIT Vs Naresh Kumar Aggarwala [2019] taxmann.com 249 (Delhi)/[2011] 198 Taxman 194 (Delhi)/[2011] 331 ITR 510 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that there was a presumption raised under section 132(4A) on seizure of fax message and it was upon assessee to rebut that presumption by offering a plausible explanation. 3. Mahabir Prasad Rungta Vs CIT [2014] 43 taxmann.com 328 (Jharkhand)/[2014] 266 CTR 175 (Jharkhand) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court held that loose sheets seized during search sometimes contain valuable information and thus those are to be regarded as' documents' within meaning of section 158B(b). There is presumption raised under section 132(4A) regarding documents seized and in light of such presumption, assessee ought to have produced other documents to disprove entries made in loose sheets. 4. Bhagheeratha Engineering Ltd Vs ACIT [2017] 79 taxmann.com 325 (Kerala)/[2015] 379 ITR 244 (Kerala)/[2016] 282 CTR 209 (Kerala) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon'ble Kerala High Court held that in view o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rations took place, statement of Shri R.K. Miglani was recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act at the premises and u/s 133A of the Act at the premises of the assessee. This also makes it clear that Shri R. K. Miglani was searched and UPDA was surveyed. Otherwise, there was no need for examining Shri R.K. Miglani under two different sections i.e. 132(4) and 133A of the Act. 199. If the search warrant was never executed at the premises of the assessee, it leads to only one conclusion that the assessee was never searched. If the assessee was never searched u/s 132 of the Act, assessments framed u/s 153A of the Act are bad in law because provisions of section 153A provides for assessment in case of search or requisition." Hon'ble ITAT is the highest fact finding authority. Stating that there was name of the assessee in search warrant at P/25, 1st Floor, South Extension, Part - 2, New Delhi and then holding proceedings u/s 153A are invalid on the ground that no Warrant of Authorization u/s 132 of the Act was executed at the premises of the assessee is absurd. It was held that proceedings u/s 153A are bad in law since there was no search at premises of the assessee which is a pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f payments outside books of account were seized. 2. As per para 27 of the ITAT order, seized papers relied upon CIT(DR) were to be made Annexure to the ITAT order. However, copy of the ITAT order received does not contain these Annexures. 3. The CIT(DR) heavily relied upon the fact that based upon seized documents and statement of Sh R.K.Miglani, registration of the assessee was cancel led and the cancellation was upheld by Hon'ble Delhi High Court as well as Supreme Court. It is surprising that Hon'ble ITAT in its para 72 has held that Failure to allow cross examination was denial of principle of natural justice whereas Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of assessee itself has held the statement to be valid and based upon it cancel led registration u/s 12AA 4. The CIT(DR) heavily relied upon the fact that presumptions u/s 132(4A) was available since the documents were seized from premises of the assessee. ITAT has not considered this argument. Moreover, it has held the proceedings u/s 153A themselves to be invalid. 5. Hon'ble ITAT had not considered detailed written arguments given by CIT DR with regard to cross examination of Mr R K Mig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the order. For the sake of ready reference, the relevant case of the order is reproduced as under: "45. We do not find any force in the contentions of the ld. DR. Firstly, the cancellation of registration u/s 12AA of the Act in the case of UPDA is altogether a different issue. The Assessing Officer cancelled the registration on the strength of the statement of Shri R.K. Miglani and search which took place at his residence. The Tribunal upheld the order of the Assessing Officer which was affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. But this was in the context of provisions of section 12AA of the Act, and, therefore, cannot be stretched to the proceedings u/s 153C of the Act in respect of 11 distilleries. A judgment has to be considered in the context in which it was delivered. 46. The Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, has heavily relied upon the entries found in the impounded documents. But, there is not even a single finding by the Assessing Officer which could suggest that the corresponding entries were found in the regular books of account of any of the distillery. This shows that no independent verification/examination was don....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt has not held that the term "belong to" is inter-changeable with "relating to" or "pertaining to". 52. As mentioned elsewhere, the Revenue has not brought anything on record to establish that the production figures reflected in the tables were forwarded by the appellants through a fax message or on its letter head. This was clear mandate of the Hon'ble High Court when it remitted the matter to the file of the Tribunal. 53. The ld. DR emphasized that the document 114 of Annexure A-1 bears the signature of two employees but we have to say that during the course of assessment proceedings, these employees were never questioned by the Assessing Officer to verify whether they actually put the signatures on those documents. In our considered opinion, such documents are only hearsay evidence. 54. Another theory propounded by the Revenue is that every distillery had to contribute Rs. 20/- per case and had thus contributed such a sum is entirely unsupported by any material. It is not known who had collected the alleged sum to have been contributed and what is the destination of such sum. In none of the documents, name of the payee, any public servant or pol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;ble Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Vs. CIT in Civil Appeal No. 4228 OF 2006 has held as under: "According to us, not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity in as much as it amounted to violation of principles of natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected." 66. The ld. DR has strongly emphasized on the evidentiary value of the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act and has relied upon several judicial decisions to support his contentions. The ld. DR further relied upon the provisions of section 132(4A) of the Act and 292C of the Act. These sections read as under: "Section 132(4) in The Income- Tax Act, 1995 (4) The authorised officer may, during the course of the search or seizure, examine on oath any person who is fond to be in possession or control of any books of account, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and any statement made by such person during such examination may thereafter be used in ev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....person's handwriting, and in the case of a document stamped, executed or attested, that it was duly stamped and executed or attested by the person by whom it purports to have been so executed or attested. Where any books of account, other documents or assets have been d to the requisitioning officer in accordance with the provisions of 132A, then, the provisions of sub-section (1) shall apply as if such books of account, other documents or assets which had been taken into custody from on referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c), as the case may be, of sub-section (1) of section 132A had been found in the possession or control of that person in the course of a search u/s 132." 67. A plain reading of the aforementioned sections would show that the presumption is available in the case of a person who was found in the possession or control i.e. the 'searched person'. Therefore, the presumption may be good against Shri R.K. Miglani or UPDA. But not in the cases of "the other person" which are the distilleries in the present appeals. Therefore, the judicial decisions relied upon by the ld. DR are misplaced and, therefore, needs no specific mention.....