TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 562
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/-, the CIT(A) has granted a relief of Rs. 59,87,250/- and has erred in confirming the other addition, which is against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in considering certain unauthenticated loose documents seized from the premises of some other party, which do not have the confirmation/signatures of the assessee, cannot be taken as conclusive evidence against the assessee for alleged transactions outside the books of accounts and the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause Vs Union of India has been ignored summarily. 3. Notwithstanding the above said facts, there cannot be any addition of Rs. 64,12,500/-, Rs. 37,23,000/-(27,78,500 on 25.1.2012 and Rs. 9,44,500/- on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8,836/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was issued and complied with. During the scrutiny proceedings, it was noticed in the search and seizure action on 04/20/2012 in the case of M/s Kaartika Gold Enterprises, Batala certain incriminating document related to the assessee were found. The Assessing Officer confronted the document to the assessee and also recorded statement of the Directors of the assessee company under section 131 of the Act. In view of the failure on the part of the assessee to explain those documents, the Assessing Officer made certain additions and assessed the total income at Rs. 2,18,12,740/- in the assessment order dated 31/03/2015. Ag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ain whether the cash so reflected in the seized papers as above was account for in the books of accounts or not. The reply of the assessee perused as well as on verification of the seized material available and the appraisal report revealed that M/s KGE is involved in wholesale business of gold and bullion. The assessee company during the year has also entered into some transactions of purchase and sales of gold with M/s KGE. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case it is clear that the assessee has made transactions of sale purchase of gold with M/s KGE and transactions shown on the seized material has also reconciled partially with the books of accounts of the assessee company. The partial reconciliation/matching of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e perused and found no merits in it. In respect of the entries/transactions of Rs. 9,44,500/- and Rs. 27,78,500/- as shown in Annexure -A2/X2 seized from the premises of M/s KGE reflects that M/s KGE has paicfRs. 37,23,000/- in total to the assessee company. The name of the assessee company mentioned against the said cash transaction as JAIN JEW. The cash so received by the assessee on 09.02.2012 and 25.01.2012 respectively from M/s KGE was not reflected/account for in the regular books of accounts of the assessee company. The assessee has not filed any explanation in respect of non reflection of said cash in the books of accounts. Thus, in absence of any explanation, it is held that the assessee has received cash of Rs. 37,23,000/- against....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of gold / bullion to M/S KGE on 06.03.2012. In response of query made to the sale of 5808.75 grams of gold/ bullion the AR of the assessee company has only substantiate the sale of 4308.75 grams of gold/bullion to M/s KGE and the sale of remaining 1500 grams of gold / bullion are remained unexplained and not found recorded in the books of the assessee company. In respect of non reflection of the sale of 1500 grams of gold / bullion, the reply of the AR is not found satisfactory. Thus, in absence of any explanation, it is held that the assessee has made sale of 1500 grams gold / bullion equal to Rs. 33,57,750/- to M/s KGE and the sale consideration received on the sale of 1500 grams gold / bullion are also not recorded in the books of accou....