TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 879
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7, the same will cover most of the issues in all the appeals. For the sake of ready reference, the grounds of appeal for various years are reproduced hereunder: 2. 1 Grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are reproduced as under: ITA No. 4039/Del/2017 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the A. O. to delete the addition made u/s 68 of the I. T. Act on account of unexplained cash credits amounting to Rs. 16,36,62,120/-. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the A. O. to delete the addition of Rs. 8,18,311/- as unexplained expenditure on account of brokerage. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in law and on facts by relying on the decision in the case of Sh. Kabul Chawla by the jurisdictional High Court which has not been accepted by the department and SLP against the same has been filed before Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in law and on facts in arriving at the conclusion th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....covered from seized / incriminating material. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in law and on facts in adopting a restrictive and pedantic interpretation of the scope of assessment u/s 153A of the Act. 7 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in law and on facts in arriving at the conclusion that the words 'total income' as used in section 153A would only mean income unearthed during search when the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Canara Housing Development Company Vs. DCIT dated 09. 08. 2014 has held that total income includes income unearthed during search and any other income. 8. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other. 9. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. ITA No. 4041/Del/2017 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the A. O to delete the addition made u/s 68 of the I. T. Act on account of unexplained cash credits a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITA No. 4042/Del/2017 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts indirecting the A. O. to delete the addition made u/s 68 of the I. T. Act on account of unexplained cash credits amounting to Rs. 21,17,69,200/- on protective basis and Rs. 20,40,70,800/- on substantive basis without appreciating the facts brought on record by the A. O. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the A O. to delete the addition of Rs. 20,79,200/- as unexplained expenditure on account of brokerage without appreciating the facts brought on record by the A. O. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the A. O. to delete the addition of Rs. 23,99,260/- made on the basis of electronic data seized during the search relating to purchase of land. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the A. O. to delete the addition of Rs. 76,35,72,743/- made on account of shifting of taxable profit from steel division t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: ITA No. 4064/Del/2017 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs. 3,11,000/- u/s 69C merely on the basis certain documents seized during the course of search at third party by holding content of seized documents, Annexure, A-2 and A-6, as true, which were lack of reliability since these were unsigned / undated without bringing any material on record in support of his contention. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs. 2,46,82,226/- being average of seven days scrap purchases u/s 69C by holding the opinion of the AO as justified, whereas he himself accepted that the addition were made on estimated basis only. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstancesof the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition to the extent of Rs. 96,52,514/- by estimating 0. 75% unrecorded profit on scrap purchase as against 1% estimated by the AO without....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he AO without there being any basis for their estimation. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming addition of Rs. 1,88,64,391/- u/s 69C and Rs. 1,70,29,838/- and Rs. 36,76,987/- being 0. 75% unrecorded profit on scarp purchased and bazar/kabad scrap on estimation basis in search case u/s 132 of the Act, even without bringing any cogent material on record. 6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming estimated addition of Rs. 1,88,64,391/- u/s 69C and Rs. 1,70,29,838/- and Rs. 36,76,987/- being 0. 75% unrecorded profit on scarp purchased and bazar/kabad scrap even though he himself accepted - (a) that copies of statements, seized documents and enquiry report received from Investigation Wing of Income tax deptt. relied upon by the AO, were never confronted and cross-examination of the deponent were also not provided. (b) that unregistered dealers of scrap, transporters, truck owners, suppliers have retracted from their earlier statements relied upon by AO during cross- examination be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 31,26,490/- being 0. 75% unrecorded profit on scarp purchased on estimation basis in search case u/s 132 of the Act, even without bringing any cogent material on record. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming estimated addition of Rs. 31,26,490/- being 0. 75% unrecorded profit on scarp purchased even though he himself accepted - (a) that copies of statements, seized documents and enquiry report received from Investigation Wing of Income tax deptt. relied upon by the AO, were never confronted and cross-examination of the deponent were also not provided. (b) that unregistered dealers of scrap, transporters, truck owners, suppliers have retracted from their earlier statements relied upon by AO during cross- examination before the Excise department. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal. " ITA No. 4068/Del/2017 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition to the extent of Rs. 15,22,408/- by e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he deponent were also not provided. (b) that unregistered dealers of scrap, transporters, truck owners, suppliers have retracted from their earlier statements relied upon by AO during cross- examination before the Excise department. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal. " ITA No. 4070/Del/2017 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case,the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming addition to the extent of Rs. 7,41,523/- by estimating 0. 75% unrecorded profit on scrap purchase as against 1 % estimated by the AO without there being any basis for their estimation. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming addition of Rs. 7,41,523/- being 0. 75% unrecorded profit on scarp purchased on estimation basis in search case u/s 132 of the Act, even without bringing any cogent material on record. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming estimated addition of Rs. 7,41,523/- being 0. 75....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from steel division (Department's appeal) 763572743 528020878 1291593621 TOTAL 164480431 242543674 284067716 1198997768 691591957 2029877 2650649 988697 2587350769 4. In the first appeal, most of the additions stood deleted and some of them got confirmed, the summary of which are as under: NATURE OF ADDITION AY 07-08 AY 2008-09 AY 2009-10 AY 2010-11 AY 2011-12 AY 2012-13 AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 share application money deleted 16,36,62,120 deleted 20,36,62,120 deleted 23,59,95,000 deleted 41,58,40,000 deleted 15,81,65,000 unexplained brokerage @ 0. 5% deleted 818,311 deleted 10,18,310 deleted 11,79,975 deleted 20,79,200 deleted 7,90,825 salary paid in cash u/s 69c confirmed 311,000 confirmed 4,19,250 confirmed 11,78,500 investment in purchase confirmed 2,46,82,226 confirmed 1,88,64,391 purchase of scrap out of 1,28,70,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the search conducted on 27. 03. 2014 and allowed that the proceedings for the first search to lapse. 4. Consequently, he assessed the income of the assessee purportedly based on incriminating documents found during the course of the first search as well as the second search in the assessments under section 153A in consequent to the second search. the assessment for AY 2008-09 to 2011-12 was completed on 29. 03. 2016 and for AY 2007-08 was completed on 31. 03. 2015 and it may be pointed out that the first search dated 30. 10. 2012 was to get time-barred on 31. 03. 2015. 5. It is the contention of the assessee that after the search, the issuance of notices for the 6 preceding assessment years under section 153A is a sine-qua-non and the income has to be assessed/ reassessed consequently. In other words, after the search, the assessment for the 6 preceding assessment years under section 153A has necessarily to take place and there is no scope for any abatement. This is what comes out from the bare reading of the provisions of section 153A of the act. This is also been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of cit vs. Kabul Chawla(2015) (380 itr 573) an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ould not have used the material found in another independent search. " 6. In the case of the assessee, a search and seizure action under section 132(1) of the Act was conducted on 30. 10. 2012 on various business premises of M/s Prakash Industries Ltd. However, before the issuance of notices under section153A, another search under Section 132(1) of the Act was carried out on 31. 03. 2014 at the business premises of the assessee. Thus, there were two searches carried out in the case of the assessee within a span of two years. Interestingly, the ld. Assessing Officer issued notices under section153A in relation to the 1st search (i. e. , on 30. 10. 2012), on 27. 06. 2014 which was after the date of second search for the Assessment Years 2007-08 to 2012-13. However, no return of income was filed in response to this notice. Thereafter, the Ld. AO issued notices on 14. 08. 2014 under section 153A for A. Y. 2008-09 to 2013-14 in consequence to the 2ndsearch. In response to this notice, return was filed on 17. 11. 14. However, the Ld. AO passed a single assessment order for each year from A. Y. 2008-09 to 2013-14 under section 153A of the Act by considering the second search. The or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; Name of Shareholder Amount in Rs. Amarjoti Vanijya Private Ltd. - Warrant Application Money 41,58,40,000 Total Addition 41,58,40,000 8. Before us, the ld. AR for the assessee, Mr. Ajay Wadhwa after narrating the relevant facts and the background of the case stated in his written submissions that, a combined assessment cannot be made under section 153A of the Act for the two separate searches. Provisions of section 153A mandate an assessment in respect of each of the 6 years and therefore, assessments under section 153A were to be mandatorily made in respect of the first search also based on the incriminating material seized, if any. 9. The chart representing the material used in respect of each addition made is reproduced below: Addition Description of Material found Found in which search Page no. of assessment order Share Capital A1-A14computation, intimation u/s 143(1), bank statement and schedules of balance sheet of share applicants A15-A25cheque books of share applicants on which authorised signatory has signed on blank cheques Found in first search 2-4,30 reproduced at page 2-4 Salary paid in cash u/s 69C A2 and A6 conta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years referred to in this section pending on the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate. " 11. The Ld. AR for the assessee argued that as per the section, as soon as the search is conducted, the Ld. AO is duty bound to proceed in accordance with the provisions of section 153A of the act. Notice under section 153A shall have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requiring him to file returns for six assessment years immediately preceding the previous year relevant to the assessment year in which the search takes place. Thereafter, the Ld. AO has to determine the total income of the assessee in whose case a search or requisition has been initiated in respect of each of the 6 assessment years. The initiation of proceedings under section 153A is mandatory for all the assessment years falling within the six years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search or requisition was made. 12. The AR for the assessee also submitted that the Ld. AO had no opti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... other words there will be only one assessment order in respect of each of the six AYs "in which both the disclosed and the undisclosed income would be brought to tax. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each assessment year on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record of the Assessing Officer. " c. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of MadugulaVenu266CTR 373 has held that: "section 153a is couched in mandatory language which implies that once there is a search, the assessing officer has no option but to call upon the assessee to file the returns of the income for the earlier six assessment yeaRs. it is not merely the undisclosed income that will be brought to tax in such assessments, but the total income of the assessee, including both the income earlier disclosed and income found consequent to the search, would be brought to tax. " d. Canara Housing Development Co. v DCIT [2014]49 taxmann. com 98 (Karnataka High Court) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l assess or reassess the 'total income' of six assessment years which means the said total income includes income which was returned in the earlier return, the income which was unearthed during search and income which is not the subject-matter of aforesaid two income. e. Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of JSW Steel Ltd. 422ITR 71 has held that: "the assessing officer is mandated to issue notice to such person to furnish return of income in respect of each assessment year falling within six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made. such returns of income shall be treated to be returns of income furnished under section 139. Once returns are furnished, income is to be assessed or re-assessed for the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which such search is conducted or requisition is made. thus, once section 153-a(1) is invoked, assessment for 6 assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search is conducted or requisition is made becomes open to assessment or re-assessment. two....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... officer is then required to assess or reassess total income of the said six years and, out of the six years, if any assessment or reassessment is pending on the date of initiation of the search, the same would abate i. e. , pending proceedings qua the said assessment year shall not proceed thereafter and the assessment has to be made under section 153(1)(b) read with the first proviso thereunder. [para 15] Besides this, he also relied upon various judgments of the Tribunal. 14. The second limb of argument was that assessment in pursuance of first search did not abate due to the subsequent search. The Ld. AR for the assessee stated that as soon as a search takes place, section 153A comes into play and a notice for 6 years has to be necessarily issued and assessment/ re-assessment for those years has to be made. This process has to be followed to consummate and put at rest the proceedings consequent to search which have resulted into assessment. There is no scope for not issuing notices and not making assessment once a search has taken place. The Ld. AR for the assessee contended that the Ld. AO cannot take shelter under a subsequent search to hold that the first search relate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....first search were issued only after the date of second search. Therefore in the very first place, on the date of second search, no return was filed in pursuanceto the notice under section 153A relating to the first search and therefore no proceedings were pending in respect of the first search on the date of second search. Hence if no proceedings relating to the first search were pending, there can be no abatement of the same. 17. The AR futher stated that the words 'Assess or reassess' used in section have been defined in the case laws and from the language, it is very clear that the word pending is used in context of original assessments and original returns and not in regard of assessments under section 153A. Some of the decisions relied upon for the propositions are briefly referred hereinunder: a. Kabul Chawla - Delhi HC - 380 ITR 573 "In absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can be made. The word 'assess' in section 153a is relatable to abated proceedings (i. e. , those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to complete assessment proce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... terms of original assessments i. e under section 143(2) or 147 of the Act. It is a cardinal rule of interpretation, that a proviso to a particular provision of a statute only embraces the field that is covered by the main provision to which it has been enacted as a proviso and to no other. A proviso is subsidiary to the main section and it must be construed in the light of the section itself. The object of the proviso, as it has so often been stated, is to carve out from the main section a class or category to which the main section does not apply. But in carving out from the main section one must always bear in mind what is the class referred to in the main section and must also remember that the carving out intended by the proviso is from the particular class dealt with by the main section and from no other class. Hence, the proviso cannot render the entire main section inoperative. 19. The AR of the assessee also stated that in construing a proviso of a section, a situation giving rise to anomaly and absurdity must be avoided. The proviso to the section has to be read so as not to restrict the beneficial effect of the meaning of the section. It has to be borne in mind that w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."Income Escaping Assessment" The marginal note of Section 153A is "Assessment in case of search or requisition" The proviso to section 153A talks about "assessment and reassessment" and not "assessment in case of search or requisition". 20. He further contended that the word "shall" is used in section 153A for both, issuance of notice consequent to search and mandatory assessments thereafter. In fact, the word has been used again in the first proviso expressing a strong assertion that assessments are to be mandatorily made for each of the 6 years once a search takes place. The word shall is also used in section 143 which means that assessments under section 143(3) are mandatory after issuance of notice under section 143(2). However, in the section 147 "Income escaping assessment" the word used is "may" which means that the AO may or may not pass an order. Therefore, whenever a search takes place under section 153A, assessment for the six preceding years, has to take place. From a plain reading of the second proviso, it can be seen that the second proviso does not talk of situation where all 6 years are pending on the date of search. It takes into account where ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....et of share applicants A15-A25cheque books of share applicants on which authorized signatory has signed on blank cheques Found in first search 2-4, 30 reproduced at page 2-4 23. The Ld. AR for assessee stated that material found during the course of first search cannot be used in making assessments in pursuance to the second search. If the department has not made an assessment in pursuance to the first search, material found during the course of the said first search cannot be used in respect of the assessment years relating to and in consequence of the 'second' search. According him, material found during search does not even pertain to the impugned assessment year and infact in the description given by the Ld. AO himself, at page 2 of the order, only A21 pertains to cheque book of M/s Amar Jyoti Vanijya Pvt Ltd in respect of which addition has been made and rest all the annexures pertain to cheque books of other companies in respect of which no addition has been made and no share capital has been received from such companies during the impugned year. The cheque book is blank with signatures of authorised signatories and quite obviously does not pertain to any speci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble with the Assessing Officer which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment 'can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously an assessment has to be made under this section only on the basis of seized material. '" b. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Central -2, New Delhi v. MeetaGutgutia [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) ...the legal position, as will be discussed shortly, is that there can be no addition made for a particular assessment year without there being an incriminating material qua that assessment year which would justify such an addition...the court is unable to accept the submissions of revenue that there was incriminating material other than what has been discussed in the orders of the assessing officer, commissioner (appeals) and the tribunal for the assessment years in question...[paras 38 & 39] it was also noted by the assessing officer - and this has not been disputed by the assessee - that a sum of Rs. 1. 10 crores was offered by the assessee as income in the year of search. although it was repeatedly urged by that the documents seized and furnished by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isee income in any of the earlier years. the incriminating material had to be in relation to any income that was not disclosed in the earlier returns. there was no such incriminating material to show that there was a failure by the assessee to disclose any franchisee income for those earlier years. the disclosure by the assessee on account of 'undisclosed franchisee commission' was relevant only for the year of search and not for the earlier years. [paras 49 & 50] section 153a is indeed an extremely potent power which enables the revenue to re-open at least six years of assessments earlier to the year of search. it is not to be exercised lightly. it is only if during the course of search under section 132 incriminating material justifying the reopening of the assessments for six previous years is found that the invocation of section 153a qua each of the assessment years would be justified. [paras 56 & 57] the court is of the view that the tribunal was justified in holding that the invocation of section 153a by the revenue for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2003-04 was without any legal basis as there was no incriminating material qua each of those assessment years....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... b) Signed blank cheque books, computation, intimation u/s 143(1), bank statement and schedules of balance sheet of promoter companies found in the premises of the searched person belonging to shareholder of searched person by no stretch of imagination constitute incriminating material. The directors of the investor companies were the employees of the Assessee and the investors are the promoter group companies of the Assessee. Therefore presence of cheque books at the premises of Assessee where directors were sitting is not illegal and cannot be used against the Assessee. c) The Assessee has already submitted before the Ld. AO that these documents belong to the promoter group companies and were lying with the Assessee for filing statutory returns, paying taxes, fees and statutory dues, for general routine work of ROC, income tax and return filing, etc. The Assessee also filed name, address of registered office, PAN and name of directors of promoter group companies and stated that all directors of promoter group companies were under employment with Assessee company Refer page 244, 245, 247-251 of PBK. " 27. In support, the Ld. AR for assessee relied upon the following....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... during the course of search at the assessee's premises blank singed share transfer forms of some of the descript companies, who were shown as investors in the share capital of the assessee company were found and seized and that the action u/s 132 of the act revealed that shares held by nondescript companies had been transferred to the directors and their family members at much lower price. "24. in the present case, since no incriminating material was found, therefore, the addition made by the ao u/s 153a of the act was not justified. 26. a similar view has been taken by the hon'ble jurisdictiona l high court in the case of pr. cit vs meetagutgutia prop. M/s ferns "n" petals (2017) 395 itr 526 (supra) wherein it has been held as under: "any and every document cannot be and is not an incriminating document. no addition can be made for a particular assessment year without there being an incriminating material qua that assessment year which would justify such an addition. " c. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of RRJ Securities (380 ITR 612) has held that: Facts: search was conducted on 20. 10. 2008 - certain documen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in our view, the concluded assessments cannot be interfered with mechanically and solely for the reason that a document belonging to the assessee, which has no bearing on the assessments of the assessee for the years preceding the search, was seized from the possession of the searched persons. As indicated above, in the present case, the documents seized had no relevance or bearing on the income of the assessee for the relevant assessment years and could not possibly reflect any undisclosed income. this being the undisputed position, no investigation was necessary. d. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Index Securities Pvt. Ltd. (86 taxmann. com 84) HELD: as regards the second jurisdictional requirement viz. , that the seized documents must be incriminating and must relate to the ays whose assessments are sought to be reopened, the decision of the supreme court in sinhgad technical education society (supra) settles the issue and holds this to be an essential requirement. the decisions of this court in rrj securities and arn infrastructure india ltd. v. asstt. cit [2017] 394 itr 569/81 taxmann. com 260 (delhi) also hold that in order to j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ceipts for transfer of shares, blank signed power of attorney, Memorandum and Articles of Association with some ROC papers and copy of bank statements etc. in relation to one of the share applicants, i. e. , Edward Supply P. Ltd. were impounded from his premises. "4. 9 Now regarding the second condition, the ld. cit(dr) has mentioned that documents impounded from the premises of sh. m. l. aggarwal, chartered accountant, during the course of survey proceeding are incriminating material found during the course of search. we do not agree with the contention of the ld. cit (dr) that these materials like blank shares transfer forms etc could be termed as found during the course of search at the premises of the assessee. the survey proceedings carried out at the premises of the chartered accountants, ml aggarwal are separate from the search proceedings carried out at the premises of the assessee. There is no concept of group of assessee in income-tax assessments. Each assessee is treated separately. . . . further, the assessing officer in the impugned order has not brought on record what was incriminating in the said material impounded from the premises of sh. m. l. agrawal. in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the Revenue states that there are other appeals of the Revenue pending in the Supreme Court questioning the correctness of the said decision. Nevertheless the fact remains that there is no stay of the operation of the decision of this Court in Kabul Chawla (supra) and it continues to hold the field. 8. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that the observations of the ITAT in the impugned order that there was no incriminating material "in respect of the share capital" and therefore the addition was unjustified, was not warranted. According to her this was beyond the judgment of this Court in Kabul Chawla (supra). 9. The fact remains that the Revenue itself is not disputing that in respect of the share capital no incriminating documents were found in the search proceedings. The Court's attention has been drawn to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Singhad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC) where in the context of Section 153C of the Act it was held that the incriminating material which was seized had to pertain to the AY in question. It is further held that documents seized had to establish a co-relation documents wise with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....perbook). The Ld. AO has relied on his statement however, the Ld. AO states that no evidence is given that the money is not taxable in the impugned AY. The Ld. AO therefore only relies on part of the statement and does not believe other part of it to be true. b) Statement of new directors- Pawan Guleria and Sudhir Kumar Bali referred to at page 11, 19-22, 27, 30 of the order and also at page 178-182 and 183-187 of the paperbook Statement of Pawan Guleria (new director of Ankit Nivesh Management, AmarjyotiVanija Pvt Ltd and Lokpriya Trading) on 31. 10. 12wherein he has stated that he was commercial Manager of the Assessee Company and did not know anything about the Assessee Company and was a director for name sake only. Statement of Sudhir Kumar Bali (new director of AnkitNivesh Management and Lokpriya Trading) on 30. 10. 12 wherein he stated that he was AGM (IT) of Assessee Company and did not know anything about the Assessee Company and was a director for name sake only. Statements at best state that the directors were ignorant but there is nothing stated such that conclusion be drawn that share capital has been received through accommo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat in normal circumstances, it is too much to give any credit to the statement recorded at such odd hours and such statement cannot be considered to be a voluntary statement, if it is subsequently retracted. The statements relied upon by the Ld. AO have been retracted within a span of 2-3 days and the retractions were also filed before the Ld. AO and the Ld. CIT(A) Refer page 302, 303, 305 of PBK. It is trite that when Assessee has retracted from disclosure made in statement and if no undisclosed income was found during search, the department cannot make additions on bare suspicion and presumption and solely on the basis of the statement. CBDT instructions state that confessions are often retracted by filing returns of income and the focus should be on collection of evidence of undisclosed income and no attempt should be made to obtain confession only. a) CBDT INSTRUCTION F. NO. 286/2/2003-IT (INV. II), DATED 10-3-2003 "instances have come to the notice of the board where assessees have claimed that they have been forced to confess the undisclosed income during the course of the search & seizure and survey operations. such confessions, if not based upon ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatement is something which is consequent to the search and cannot be reckoned as incriminating material found during the course of search and assessments that stood completed on the date of search cannot be made on the basis of statements. In support, the AR relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 13-22/2017. It was observed as under: "38. fifthly, statements recorded under section 132 (4) of the act of the act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this court in commissioner of income tax v. harjeevaggarwal (supra). lastly, as already pointed out hereinbefore, the facts in the present case are different from the facts in smt. dayawantigupta v. cit (supra) where the admission by the assessees themselves on critical aspects, of failure to maintain accounts and admission that the seized documents reflected transactions of unaccounted sales and purchases, is non-existent in the present case. in the said case, there was a factual finding to the effect that the assessees were habitual offenders, indulging in clandestine operations whereas there is noth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9 per unit respectively Found in first search Page 39 Unexplained Expenditure-purchase of land Electronic data seized at Chapa (party BS-I) in a seized pendrive annexure PDI-1/2)-showing table about land purchases in which 2 columns -cost as per paper and actual amount paid are mentioned Found in survey on 30. 10. 12 38 of order Page 318- 320, 867-868 of PBK 34. Ld. AR further submitted that once the Assessing Officer has not passed any assessment order consequent to the first search wherein so called incriminating material or documents were found, then those incriminating documents and material lose their significance because it was mandatory upon the Assessing Officer to pass assessment order in terms of section 153A in conseqence to first search. If he has not done so, then anything found during the course of that search stands concluded and what is to be seen is whether any incriminating document was found or not during the course of second search. Admittedly, here in this case, not an iota of any evidence or incriminating document was found during the course of second search. 35. On merits of the additions, the ld. AR has made an elaborate submission, o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h are arising out of facts and material on record and apparent from the impugned assessment order, which is evident from the following passages in the assessment order which refers to seized documents found during first search on 30. 10. 2012, which has been contested by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee that same cannot be used in assessments consequent to second search on 31. 03. 2014:- 39. Thus, being purely legal grounds arising out of facts already on record and also evident from the aforesaid excerpts of the Assessing Officer, which do not require any investigation of facts, therefore, same are being admitted for the purpose of our adjudication. 40. The relevant facts qua the legal issue raised has already been discussed in detail and also the detailed submission made by the parties and the judgments relied upon during the course of hearing. To put it succinctly, in the case of the assessee, the first search took place under section 132(1) on 30. 10. 2012. Pending the issuance of notice under section 153A and the triggering of the assessment in pursuance of such notices, another search took place on 31. 03. 2014. As stated above the notices under section153A pertaining....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vided that the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within such six assessment years: provided further that assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years referred to in this section pending on the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate. " 42. From the plain reading of the said provision and also interpretation of this section by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia, Kabul Chawla and catena of other judgments of Hon'ble High Courts as incorporated above, following sequitter can be deduced:- • Firstly, Section 153A is a Special Scheme of assessment of income in case of a searched person. Section 153A starts with a non obstante clause and it states where a search has been initiated under section 132(1) or books of accounts any other documents or assets which are requisitioned under section132A after 31st May, 2003, the Assessing Officer is statutorily bound to (as the section mentions shall): ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n for the Assessing Officer not to pass any assessment order for six assessment years prior to the year of search, if the search has been carried out under section 132 or requisition under section 132A. There cannot be any waiver of such condition of not to pass any order; or in another words, Assessing Officer cannot acquiesce his statutory duty for passing the assessment order in terms of Section 153A. Even if the search does not yield any incriminating material or any undisclosed income, then also Assessing Officer has to assess the total income of six assessment years in terms of 1st and 2nd proviso to Section 153A. 44. Here in this case, in the letter dated 10. 03. 2021 filed by the ld. DR which has also been incorporated above, the Assessing Officer himself admitted that notice under section 153A was issued on 27. 06. 2014 in terms of 1st search conducted on 30. 10. 2012, however no assessment was completed for all assessment years prior to the date of second search. The only assessment orders which have been passed for six assessment years was in relation to second search conducted on 31. 03. 2014 and in pursuance of notice under section 153A issued on 14. 08. 2014 for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the provision of Section 153A gets triggered and all the legal formalities of issuance of notice for six years have to be necessarily complied with and assessment/re-assessment for those assessment years has to be made. In our opinion, any document or material found in any search has to be used in the assessment or re-assessments falling within the period of six years relating to that search only and procedure of Section 153A has to be followed. 47. Another moot question before us, which has been strongly convassed by the ld. CIT-DR as well discernible from the action of the Assessing Officer is that, assessment under section 153A in relation to the first search, whether can be said to be pending or not in terms of second proviso to Section 153A on the date of second search, i. e. , 31. 03. 2014? The revenue's main plank of argument is that, on the date of second search, assessments covered under section 153A in pursuance of the first search were pending and therefore, gets abated and Assessing Officer has right to assess and re-assess all the assessment years falling within the period of six years of the first search and also assessment years falling within period of second se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and re-assessee the total income of all six assessment years falling under section 153A either on the basis of incriminating documents found during the course of search or assess the income on the basis of return of income. • Even if the first search related assessments were not made and the second search took place as is the case here, then Assessing Officer should have framed separate assessment orders for six years in respect of the both searches within the time provided in the statute. In case the assessment years are overlapping then qua that assessment year the assessed income u/s 153A of that year as determined in that search, becomes the assessed income u/s 153A of the second search and if any incriminating material is unearthed in the second search then same can be used to further determine the income of the assessee. 49. There could be another angle here in this case, while interpreting the word 'pending assessment' as used in second proviso to Section 153A. Firstly, no notice under section 153A was issued in pursuance of first search before the date of second search, i. e. , 31. 03. 2014; and admittedly no return of income was filed in pursuanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra) have clearly held that there can be no addition for a particular assessment year without there being any incriminating material qua that assessment year which could justify such an addition. The incriminating material has to be in relation to any income that was not disclosed in the earlier return and if there is no incriminating material then no addition can be made qua those assessment years whose assessment were completed earlier. There is no case of the Department before us that the share capital or the other additions made were based on material found during the second search. This has been clearly held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. SMC Power Generation Ltd. (Delhi HC) in ITA No. 406/2019, following the principle of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Singhad Technical Education Society (supra). Here in this case, all the proceedings relating to the following assessment years were completed and, therefore, cannot be reopened in the absence of any incriminating documents found during the course of that search. The chart of completed and pending assessments on date of second search in terms of second proviso to section 153A is reproduced as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... management of M/s Prakash Industries were found and they constitute incriminating material and therefore, addition to share application money has been made. 54. We have perused the submissions of the assessee, submissions of the revenue as well as the facts of the case and find that the material in respect of investor companies were admittedly found during the course of first search and therefore, it cannot be used against the assessee for making the addition in the assessment proceedings consequent to the second search and therefore, the very basis of addition on account of share application money does not survive. Hence, the addition of Rs. Rs. 16,36,62,120/- for the AY 2007-08, Rs. 20,36,62,120/- for the AY 2008-09, Rs. 23,59,95,000/- for the AY 2009-10, Rs. 41,58,40,000/- for the AY 2010-11 and Rs. 15,81,65,000/- for the AY 2011-12 on account of share application money stands deleted and consequential addition of brokerage @. 5% on such amount of share capital also stands deleted. 55. Without prejudice, we have examined the nature of the material found and we find that the same cannot be said to be incriminating. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the cases of RRJ Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Notice of EOGM, resolution at EOGM regarding 100,00,000 warrants to M/s Amarjoti Vanija Pvt. Ltd. at 81/- per share warrant 260-266 Warrant certificate regarding 100,00,000 warrants at 81/- per share warrant issued to M/s Amarjoti Vanija Pvt. Ltd. 206 of PBK of AY 2009-10 Certificates of Company Secretary confirming the receipt of share/warrant application money from M/s Amarjoti Vanija Pvt. Ltd. and compliance of allotment of shares as per SEBI Guidelines on conversion on warrants 207-209 of PBK of AY 2009-10 Certificate of Chartered Accountant certifying that the warrants were allotted to M/s Amarjoti Vanija Pvt. Ltd. which is not a promoter, company has complied with all the provisions of SEBI Guidelines, company has received share/warrant application money and lock in period of shares of one year from the date of allotment. 210-215 of PBK of AY 2009-10 Detail of allotment of 1 crore equity shares of face value of Rs. 10/- at premium of Rs. 71/- per share on conversion of warrants along with copy of share Certificates. 218-220 of PBK of AY 2009-10 Letter of NSDL for conversion of said warrants into equity shares 221-223 of PBK of AY 2009-10 L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quent to the second search and even otherwise, according to the appellant, the document is dumb as it clearly states that the salary was only proposed and never paid. The screenshot of the said documents is reproduced as under. 61. Apart from the fact that these documents were not seized durin second search and our finding given in respect of other additions will apply mutatis mutandis, it has been argued that these were purely in the nature of dump documents and assessee has rebutted these documents before the authorities below. In support, the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Ved Prakash Chaudhary [2010] 3 taxmann. com 785, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. S. M. Agarwal [2007] 293 ITR 43 (Delhi), CIT v. Vivek Aggarwal [2015] 56 taxmann. com 7 (Delhi), CIT vs. Anil Bhatia [2010] 322 ITR 191 (Delhi HC), CIT vs. Anil Bhalla [2010] 322 ITR 191 (Delhi), Girish Chaudhary [2008] 296 ITR 619 (Delhi), Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Yusuf & ANR. Vs. D& ANR. AIR 1968 Bom 112 etc, were relied upon. Loking to the nature of documents, we have no hesitation in holding that based on these documents this expenditure cannot be added as in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee had also sought cross examination of the various persons referred to in Excise order which has not been provided, the addition is also against the principles of natural justice. On this count also, the addition deserves to be deleted. 65. Thus, we have no hesitation to delete this addition, the appellant gets relief of Rs. 2,46,82,226/- in AY 2008-09, Rs. 1,88,64,391/- in A. Y. 2009-10 in respect of addition relating to investment on purchase and Rs. 1,28,70,018/- in AY 2008-09, Rs. 2,27,06,450/- in AY 2009-10, Rs. 1,39,28,065/- in AY 2010-11, Rs. 41,68,654/- in AY 2011-12, Rs. 20,29,877/- in AY 2012-13, Rs. 26,50,649/- in AY 2013-14 and Rs. 9,88,697/- in AY 2014-15 in respect of addition relating to purchase of scrap and Rs. 49,02,650 in AY 2009-10 in respect of unaccounted investment. 66. Ground No. 3 of ITA No. 4042 and 4043/D/2017 forAY 2010- 11 and 2011-12 of department's appeal relating to the payment of land at Chhattisgarh. Addition to income of Rs. 23,99,260/- in AY 2010-11 and Rs. 4,46,600/- in AY 2011-12 has been made on account of payment of land at Chhattisgarh. This addition is also made on the basis of evidence found during the course of survey on 30. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ard area. On merits also, the assessee has established that the purchase of power is at arm's length and has given the rates of power of various authorities including the India Energy Exchange. 70. The detail written submissions of the assessee on this issue are already reproduced below:- I. A combined assessment cannot be made under section 153A of the Act for the two separate searches. Provisions of section 153A mandate an assessment in respect of each of the 6 years and therefore, assessments under section 153A were to be mandatorily made in respect of the first search also based on the incriminating material seized, if any II. Assessments in pursuance of the first search do not abate due to the subsequent search III. Material found during the first search was not incriminating and does not even pertain to the assessment year in which addition is made Description of Material found Found in which search Page no. of assessment order A-6 (pg 6,8,37) showing power cost per unit dated 14. 5. 12 and 20. 08. 12 @3. 04 and 2. 09 per unit respectively Found in first search Page 39 1. Material found during first search cannot be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f search and therefore assessments in pursuance to the search cannot be made since AY 2010-11 was completed assessment on date of search V. Tax has been paid on book profits and any change in sale price will not impact the book profits 1. The Assessee has paid tax of Rs. 42. 81 crores on book profits of Rs. 251. 89 crores refer page 141-142 and 507-508 of PBK. 2. Even if the allegation of the Ld. AO is believed to be true, even then there will be no change in the tax liability of the Assessee. 3. The book profits will remain unchanged as the profit of power division will reduce but profit of steel division will increase by the same amount. The tax liability as per normal provisions would still be less than tax as per MAT. 4. The Assessee submitted the same before the Ld. AO and even filed the computation before and after considering the addition made by the Ld. AO. However the Ld. AO failed to consider the same. 5. The Ld. CIT (A) has considered this reply and deleted the addition stating that Assessee has paid tax under Mat and no demand is created by AO after reducing deduction under 80IA of act hence no tax benefit is achieve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....side parties- Refer page 411-417 * Average rate of power as per India Energy Exchange * Copy of rates as per IEX - Refer page 418-425 * Average rate of power purchased by Steel division from CSEB * Month wise details of power purchased from CSEB along with bills -Refer page 426-506 5. The Ld. AO absolutely ignored the reply filed by the Assessee and made the addition. a. A. T. Kearney India (P. ) Ltd. v. ACIT [2014] 35 ITR(T) 100 (Delhi - Trib. ) "Now as regards (ii) above, the major thrust of arguments has been on it. This ingredient provides course of business between the assessee and such other closely connected person should be so arranged that it produces more than the ordinary profits to the assessee carrying on eligible business. A bare reading of the relevant part of the provision indicates that in order to invoke this provision, it is of utmost importance on the part of the Assessing Officer to first demonstrate that the transactions between the assessee and the other related person were 'arranged' with a view to produce more profit to the assessee carrying on eligible business. [Para 8. 3] ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the effective marketing strategy, but because of the close connection with the buyer, the arrangement is such so as to show higher sale price in the accounts of the person carrying on eligible business, the profit will still be high. Though in both the cases the profit of the eligible business will be higher, but in the first instance it will be higher due to better marketing strategy and in the second, it will be higher due to 'arrangement'. What is relevant for invoking subsection (10) is the prevalence of the second situation above where the higher profit has resulted due to 'arrangement' between the assessee and its closely connected person and not the first, where the higher profit resulted due to the assessee's effectively managing the business. Thus, it is evident that though in both the situations, the profit is higher, but recourse to sub-section (10) can be taken only in the case of 'arrangement' between the assessee and the closely connected person. In other words, the mere higher profit of the person carrying on the eligible business is no criteria to press into service this provision, unless the 'arrangement' is pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tand of the assessee is that sub-section (10) is not applicable since it is applicable to the transactions between the assessee and third person. In this case before us, the transactions are between the two units of the assessee and if at all, any provision is to be applied i. e. sub-section (8) of section 80IA. As per the said section, if any goods are transferred to an eligible business from other business and the consideration of the goods transferred does not correspond to the market value then the Assessing Officer has the power to re-compute the price and disallow the deduction. For applying the provisions of sub-section (8), the Assessing Officer can make disallowance on concrete basis and not on presumptions and surmises. The Assessing Officer has not been able to point out that the market value of the canopies sold by Chakan unit to Silvassa unit was much higher. The assessee has clarified that the canopies sold to Kirloskar were not comparable to the canopies sold to Silvassa Unit. Secondly, he has considered an indirect benefit of Rs. 10,000/- for the canopies in respect of which no comparable price has been cited. Thus, this addition is not justified and method adopted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Expenditure declared and disclosed as incurred for non-exempt unit could not be treated and transposed as expenditure incurred on exempt unit, on assumptions and surmises by referring to difference in turnover, expenses and net profit rate of exempt and nonexempt units. This cannot justify the Assessing Officer's direction to shift 90 per cent of the expenditure from the nonexempt unit and treat it as expenditure of the exempt unit, thereby reducing the profit in the STPI unit. Inference and deduction solely based and predicated on net profit rate is nothing but a surmise and conjecture. Under section 144 of the Act, book results cannot be rejected only on the ground of decrease or difference in gross profit rate compared to other years or another assessee. Neither can the book results be rejected for the reason that gross or net profit rates in the two lines of business are different. The difference can be the starting point of investigation and verification but not the essence to reject the book results and make best judgment assessment. [Para 7]" b. CIT v. Schmetz India (P. ) Ltd. [2012] 26 taxmann. com 336 (Bom. ) "8. So far as questions (a) & (b) are co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and its related party by which these transactions so arranged has to produce more than the ordinary profits in the hands of assessee, whether has been fulfilled or not needs to be examined. On perusal of the assessment order, it is very much evident that only relying upon TP document of assessee wherein it is stated that average profit margin of comparable company is 15% as against 50% of assessee, AO has concluded that profit earned by assessee is not at arm's length. AO has not given a conclusive finding as to whether earning of such excess profit is as a result of business arrangement between the parties Even, ld. CIT(A) has also not given any factual finding on the issue to conclusively prove that assessee and its related party has arranged their business affairs in such a manner that it will result in more than reasonable profit to assessee. Merely relying upon the fact that in the TP documentation the average margin of comparable companies are 15% where as the assessee has shown profit at 50%, the departmental authorities have reduced the deduction claimed u/s 10A by restricting the profit from the eligible business of assessee to 20% of the turnover. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot conclusively proved the fact that there is an arrangement between assessee and its AE by which the transactions were so arranged as to produce more than the ordinary profits in the hands of assessee, disallowance of part deduction claimed by applying the provisions of section 80IA(10), in our view is not justified. Since ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance without examining the aforesaid aspect, order of ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside. The conditions of section 80IA(1) having not been fully complied by AO, disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80IA(10), in our view is not justified. Accordingly, we delete the addition made by AO in this regard. " 71. First of all, it is seen that, tax has been paid on book profits and any change in sale price will not impact the book profits. The Assessee has paid tax of Rs. 42. 81 crores on book profits of Rs. 251. 89 crores. Even if the allegation of the Ld. AO is believed to be true, even then there will be no change in the tax liability of the Assessee. The book profits will remain unchanged as the profit of power division will reduce but profit of steel division will increase by the same amount. The tax liability as per normal pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Whether assessment u/s 143(3) was Assessment u/s 143(3) for A.Y.2007-08 was completed on done before the first search. 4. 23.12.2009, A.Y. 2008-09 was completed on 11.05.2010. A.Y.2009-10 was completed on 28.03.2011. As per office record no record are available for A.Y.2010-11 whether assessment u/s 143(3) was completed or not. As per ITD application the case was selected for scrutiny u/s 143(3) for A.Y.2010-11 through CASS. Accordingly notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 29.08.2011 which was T.B. on 31.03.2012. Also give reply/comments as asked Reply/comments are given as per Table "B" below. above on the second search B: Second Search: conducted on 29.03.2014 (Comments on S No. 4) 1. Whether 153A was issued in A.Y.2008-09 to 2013-14 pursuant to second search 2. Which years among these were pending and abated on the date of second search. Please give details in a tabular form with due date of return, last date for issue of notice u's 143(2) and actual date of issue of Notice u/s 143(2) 3. Whether assessment u/s 143(3) was done before the second search. appeal. Yes, Notice u/s 153A were issued again on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed again the Act on 31 March, 2014 by DDIT (Inv.). Raipur, Chhattisgarh. A copy of the Panchnama is enclosed herewith. As per the proviso of Section 153A of the Act that assessment or re-assessment relating to earlier assessment years prior to the year of search stands abated e. pending on the date of initiation of the search U/s. 132 of the Act Consequent to the search on 31" March' 2014, the proceedings relating to the year under reference pending on the date of initiation of search u/s 132 stands abated. therefore, requested to kindly keep the above said notice in abeyance requiring asses to lile return u/s.153A of the Act issued to us. We hope that this is Kent plane of your notice u/s.153A of the Act (supra). In any case, we est furnish the cupies of the documents seized during the course of search. Lasthfully, Prakash Industries Limited 1 irector 24 Document 2 Introduction of Share Capital At the time of search dated 30.10.2012 at corporate office of M/s Prakash Industries Ltd., Sriwan Bijwasan, New Delhi, various incriminating documents were found and seized including Annexure A-15 to A-25, which are cheq....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tyaniya Pvt Ltd. for 3-4-2012 to 31-3-2012 Trial Balance of Amariyoti Vaniye Pvt Ltd Janeware-A- 11 to 12 14 16 to 32 31 34 to 35 37 39 49 to 50 53 & 54 55 to 68 69 70 Page No. 1 to 124 Directors report of Amarjyoti Vanya Pvt. Ltd. dated 31-8-2000 signed by matbar singh and Pawan guferia Notice dated 31-3-2000 signed by Matbar Singh for Amaryo Vanilya Pvt Ltd. Journal register of Amar voti Vanilya Pvt Ltd. for 1-4-2008 to 31-3-2009 Computation of income of Amariyati Vanitya Pvt. Ltd. for A.Y. 2009-10 Income tax return for the Y. 2009-10 of Amariyoti Vanya Pvt. Ltd. Demand notice u/s 156 of the LT. Act to Amarte Vaniye Pvt. Ltd. for the A.Y. 2009-10 Assessment order of Amaro Vaniye Pvt. Ltd. for A.Y. 2009-10 Computation of income of Amarjyoti Vanitya Pvt. Ltd. for A.Y. 2010-11 Balance sheet abstract and company's general profile of Amartpot Vanya Pvt. Lid Directors report of Amaro Vanya Pvt. Ltd. dated 31-8-2009 signed by sudhir kumar bal Computation of income of Amoriyoti Vanijya Pvt Ltd. for the A.Y. 2011-12 income tax returns for the AY. 2011-12 of Amariyoti Vandive Pvt. Ltd. Statement of bank ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....documents is as under: S.No. Annexure Page Remark As on F.Y. 1. 2 53 2008-09 2. 2 56 2008-09 Total of page 2.81,000 30000 3. 2 52 2009-10 43700 4. 2 57 2009-10 5. 2 25, 26 2010-11 6. 6 51 2010-11 6 53 2010-11 374500 11,02,750 50,750 25,000 From the above seized annexure it is gathered that aforesaid amount has been given as salary in cash to employees of M/s Prakash Industries Limited during the respective financial years. These documents found and seized have columns as under For example page no 56 of Annexure A-2 as under: Annexure-A-2 Page 56 Details of salary, Barbil, As on 31-03-2008 S.No. Name of employee 1 A.B. Singh 2 K.P. Singh 3 Mahavir 4 S.K. Jha Total Salary 51200 Cash Total 18750 69950 31500 31200 5000 36500 5000 36200 19400 1250 20650 30000 From the above seized documents, it is evident that the amount written in "cash column" has been paid in cash as salary to the respective employees (specific amount is mentioned against name of particular em....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt in purchase, Purchase of scrap, Unaccounted investment- Found in search by Excise Department Share capital & Brokerage Material found in 1" search Salary paid in cash-Material found in 1 search Shifting of profit-Material found in 1 search Unexplained expenditure in purchase of land - Found in survey on 30.10.12 Purchase of scrap Found in search by Excise Department Share capital & Brokerage Material found in 1st search Shifting of profit-Material found in 1Document 4 Sr.No. Annexure Pages 1 A-16 Pages 1 to 140 Name of the companies M/s Tools India Pvt.Ltd M/s Shree Labh Paxmi Capital Services. M/s Sanskriti Tie-up Pvt. Ltd. 2 A-18 Page 1 to 145 M/s Sarvottam Commodities Pvt.Ltd. M/s Welter securities Ltd. 3 A-21 Page 1 to 200 M/s Vanshi Farms Pvt Ltd 4 LO 5 A-22 Page 1 to 112 M/s Amarjyoti Vanijya Pvt. Ltd M/s Deo Steel & mines pvt. Ltd M/s Ankit Nivesh & management Pvt. Ltd M/s Spring Mercantile Pvt. Ltd M/s Makrana Tradecom Pvt. Ltd M/s Chaibasa Steel Pvt. Ltd. A-25 Page 1 to 180 M/s Hi-tech Mercantile Pvt. Ltd M/s Vanshi Farms Pvt. Ltd Document 5 wys ....