TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 1290
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ince, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical except variation of amounts; therefore, these appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, the grounds as well as the facts narrated in IT(SS)A No.312/AHD/2017, for assessment 2008-09, in the case of M/s Dharam Impex, have been taken into consideration for deciding the above appeals en masse. 3. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in "lead" case (in IT(SS)A No.312/AHD/2017, for assessment year 2008-09, are reproduced below: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the proceeding u/s 153C without appreciating the fact that no incriminating material was found during the course of search. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming order passed by Ld. AO u/s 144. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the rejection of books of account without pointing out any defect in books of accounts. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection going to the root of the jurisdiction of the matter and in view of the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in the case of NTPC Vs CIT(1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC) it can be raised at this stage even for the first time. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with ground raised before the ITAT for the first time relating to legal issue has held that Tribunal should not be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings although not raised earlier. It was also held that under section 254 of the Act the Tribunal has jurisdiction to examine a question of law which though not arose before lower authorities but arose before it from facts as found by lower authorities and having a bearing on tax liability of assessee. Therefore, we do not agree with contention of ld DR for the Revenue to the effect that assessee cannot raise this legal issue first time before the Tribunal. Since the additional ground raised by the assessee challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings is a legal issue which goes to the root of the matter and no further inquiry is needed for deciding the said legal issue as all facts are already on record, hence we admit the said additional gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome at Rs.1,70,064/-. The assessee has not offered any additional undisclosed income in the return of income filed in response to the notice u/s 153C of the Act. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 15.06.2015 and duly served upon the assessee. 10. The assessing officer noted that search was conducted on Rajendra Jain, Sanjay Choudhary & Dharmichand Jain group on 03-10-2013. Various evidences were collected during the search which explained inter alia, the modus operandi of the "business of providing accommodation entries in the nature of bogus sales & unsecured loans". During the search proceedings, it was established by evidences & statements of Shri Rajendra Jain, Shri Sanjay Choudhary & Shri Dharmichand Jain that there group concerns are : i) Engaged in merely paper transaction ; ii) Engaged in import of rough & cut polished diamonds for other clients (who do not want to show in there books), whose physical delivery is taken by actual importers, immediately after the clearance of consignment by CHA. iii) These concerns of Rajendra Jain, Sanjay Choudhary & Dharmichand Jain are left with stock on paper & zero stock in actual. These are basis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f account to claim that business have been conducted. Auditor has verified the bills and vouchers; not the goods. 12. The assessee submitted before the assessing officer that his business activities are duly acknowledged by the other Government authorities like customs department, sale tax department. However, assessing officer rejected this contention of the assessee, stating that it is not reliable. Regarding Customs Department, as explained by assessee himself, diamonds were handed over to real beneficiaries after the clearance from customs officials. Other Government authorities has not done any physical verification as the I.T. department has done. Issuance of sales tax/ VAT registration, payment of trade tax (in certain cases) are done by State- Authorities. There is no evidence brought before the department whether any spot verification or any physical verification is carried out by such authorities, on other hand proceedings u/s 132, collection of evidences and information's during the course of such proceedings as well as corroborative verification with parties, transactions undertaken by this assessee prove that no real business was being carried out by this assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Jain [2010] 191 Taxman 319 (Chhattisgarh) Hon'ble High Court held that burden of proving that statement under section 132(4) was obtained by coercion or intimidation lies upon assessee. Proof of threat or coercion is necessary for valid retraction. The allegation that the assessee was tortured and harassed by the search team and was forced to make an admission is not enough [Manharlal Kasturchand Chokshi v. Asstt. CIT [1997] 61 ITD 55 (Ahd.)]. The Mumbai Tribunal, in the case of Param Anand Builders (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1996] 59 ITD 29, has held that allegations of torture and harassment were unacceptable when independent witnesses were present at the time of search. Mere filing of a letter retracting the statement was not held to be rebuttal of the presumption that what is admitted is true. The Tribunal's observations were also based on the fact that the 'Panchas' had not brought any harassment to the notice of the higher authorities. In the present case assessee failed to prove by any legally acceptable evidence that statement of the partners given during search was involuntary or was tender under coercion or duress or was under misconception of facts. 14. Based o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 13.01.2014, the assessment orders, the contentions of the appellant and the case law on the issue including that relied upon by the appellant. The basic objection of the appellant is that the reopening of the case; is not based on incriminating documents/evidence unearthed during search. As discussed subsequently in detail in this order; Shri Dharmichand Jain through the businesses in the style of firms and companies where he is partner/director as a group (i) businesses were found with no physical stock of diamond at all, (ii) correspondence or orders, were found not placed by the assessee and his group to the foreign concern from which imports were shown in the books. All this prove that his admission was given when corroborative evidence was unearthed during the course of search. The above observations/evidences are being discussed in detail later in the order. In the light of above, where such evidences pertaining to the appellant was recovered during the course of search at the premises of Shri Dharmichand Jain and other group cases and there was clear admission (even confirmed after 3 months) that the nature of business of Shri Dharmichand Jain, through, various concerns i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tinent observations are culled out from the facts and circumstances of the case: a) Not a single piece of diamond was found from the different premises of the appellant and group concerns although there was substantial stock as per books of account. The evidence was confronted to Shri Dharmichand Jain (partner of the appellant firm); and only after two days of search starting and on the 2nd day of statement being recorded did he admit (Q. No. 30) that they were only doing paper transactions in various companies and firms where he was partner/director. b) Shri Dharmichand Jain himself, as discussed above; has admitted the entire modus operandi of how he runs the businesses in various concerns controlled by him to show bogus transactions of imports of rough diamonds and sales and actually through these entities helps actual importers to remain benami, provide bogus bills and bogus credits etc, without actually not at all trading in the diamonds as shown in regular account books and income tax returns. c) Shri Dharmichand Jain has admitted it not only during search on 5th Oct. 2013 but has reiterated it again in the statement recorded on 13.01.2014 i.e. afte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e also searches were undertaken and similar modus operandi was found the rates accepted by him are substantially higher. In light of this, where for similar businesses including that of providing of accommodation entries, the rates of commission should generally be similar due to market forces. Even otherwise, the rates applied are already too low, looking to the risk of the appellant where credit purchases (imports) are in its name and the banks would first catch him in case of default. The appellant who is engaged in helping others suppress taxable income etc. does not merit any further relief, looking to the entirety of facts and circumstances discussed above. Once, the gross profits are estimated on the basis of commission rates, the net profit has to be determined. The expenses shown in the books are obviously bogus. For instance, the appellant has been claiming expenses and incomes like exchange rates difference and expenses/commission on sales etc. When the actual business is importing for others and in books credits in the name of exporters stand for months together, naturally the exchange rate difference is not payable by the appellant. In fact, the cash payments ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of notice u/s 143(2) had already expired. Therefore, for all the assessment years except for A.Y. 2014-15, the assessment has to be treated as completed/unabated. The assessee has given the chart giving the details of date of filing of return of income, issue of notice u/s 153C and expiry of time limit u/s 143(2) and date of assessment made u/s 143(3) if made. 3. For A.Y. 2008-09, in case of Maniprabha Impex Pvt. Ltd. and Dharam Impex, assessee raised additional ground to the effect that issue of notice u/s 153C for this year is not valid. For A.Y. 2014-15, in case of all the assessees viz, Maniprabha Impex Pvt. Ltd., Dharam Impex and Kangan Jewels Pvt. Ltd., assessee took additional ground to the effect that assessment should have been made u/s 153C. All the ground including the additional grounds are discussed as under: • Additional Ground regarding validity of assessment made u/s. 153C for A.Y. 2008-09: 4. For A.Y. 2008-09 in the case of Maniprabha Impex Pvt. Ltd. [IT(SS)A No. 306/AHD/2017] and Dharam Impex [IT(SS)A No. 312/AHD/2017] the following additional ground was raised: "On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssued and the assessment was made u/s 144 only. ARGUMENTS: 9. As discussed above, the date of search is to be regarded as 13.01.2015 and action u/s 153C can be taken for preceding sex years A.Y. 2009-10 to 2014-15. Accordingly, the assessment made for A.Y. 2014-15 u/s 144 without issuing notice u/s 153C is invalid, particularly when assessing officer made addition on the basis of statement recorded u/s 132(4) and alleged so called materials collected at the time of search. • Validity of assessment u/s 153C for A.Y. 2008-09 to 2013-14: 10. For all the assessment years, all the three assessees [IT(SS)A No. 288-293, 306-317/AHD/2017 & ITA No. 1579-1580/AHD/2017] challenged validity of assessment u/s. 153C vide ground no. 1 as under: "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the proceeding u/s. 153C without appreciating the fact that no incriminating material was found during the course of search." FACTS: 11. The assessing officer has supplied the satisfaction note only in case of Maniprabha Impex Pvt. Ltd. and Dharam Impex. The satisfaction note was not supplied in case o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....whom the said document "belongs". In the satisfaction note recorded u/s. 153C it was also mentioned that the proceedings u/s 153C were initiated on the basis of statement of Shri Dharmichand Jain without mentioning any incriminating material except loose papers and pendrive. The assessing officer didn't describe any incriminating material either in the satisfaction note or in the assessment order. The statement cannot be standalone basis without reference to any material discovered during search and seizure operations can empower the assessing officer to frame block assessment u/s 153C. The statement recorded u/s 132(4) can only be basis for block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search and seizure. Merely because a satisfaction note was recorded, same could not lead to reach a conclusion that notice under section 153C was justified. 16. Prior to 01.06.2015, the proceedings u/s 153C can be taken only when the books of accounts seized in the course of search of third person belongs to assessee. However, with effect from 01.06.2015, the amendment was made and even when the books of accounts seized ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....el. HC) • PCIT vs. Index Securities Pvt. Ltd. [ 86 taxmann.com 84 ] (Del. HC) • CIT vs. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd. [ 69 taxmann.com 108 ](Kar. HC) • CIT vs. Shri Ramdas Motor Transport [ 238 ITR 0177 ](A.P. HC) • CIT vs. Naresh Kumar Agarwal [ 369 ITR 0171 ](A.P. HC) • PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd - [2017] 84 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) • Sree Lakshmi Venkateshwara Minerals vs. DCIT - [2021] 123 taxmann.com 255 • Trishul Hi-Tech Industries vs. DCIT - [IT(SS) No. 84-86/KOL/2011] 18. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the validity of assessment made u/s 153C also on the ground that the statement u/s 132(4) constituted material on record for purposes of section 153C. He relied on the judgment of Delhi High Court in case of PCIT vs. Nau Nidh Overseas (P.) Ltd. - [2017] 88 taxmann.com 665 (Delhi). However, the decision is distinguishable as in that case cash was seized in the course of search and the director admitted that the cash belonged to assessee company and therefore it was held that it was sufficient material to initiate proceedings u/s. 153C. However, in case of assessee no ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of AO of making addition by treating appellants business as fictitious and holding that appellants business as being commission agent and accommodation entry provider only. • On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of genuine expenditure and allowed only 25% of commission income as expenditure on ad-hoc basis. 21. It is submitted that Shri Dharmichand Jain retracted his statement recorded at the time of search. The retraction statement was filed on 20.01.2014 which was not rebutted till the passing of assessment order. In the course of assessment proceedings, assessee filed ample evidence that his business of trading in goods was genuine which are as under: • Import Invoices verified by Customs department • House Air Waybills showing movement of goods • Bill of entry furnished before Customs department • Details of customs duty paid on imports • Export documents verified by Customs department • Documents showing movement of goods from India to overseas • Insurance documents for goods in transit â€....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d water at the same time. In other words revenue cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time. The reliance is placed on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission [111 taxmann.com 176] and CIT vs. Advance Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. [275 ITR 30]. Accordingly, without prejudice it is submitted that the commission should be assessed as per the net profit disclosed as per the Profit and Loss A/c. When no unexplained expenditure or unexplained investment was found in the course of search, the income should be estimated by adopting net profit ratio and not gross profit ratio. 25. Further it is submitted that the lower authorities have observed that the assessee group has declared less commission income in providing accommodation entries as compared to Bhanwarlal Jain. However, the story is other way round as assessee declared more commission income as compared to Bhanwarlal Jain. The main difference is of commission on import which assessee declared at 0.2% while Bhanwarlal Jain declared commission income at 0.02%. Accordingly, assessee declared the commission income ten times than Bhanwarlal Jain and this fact is considerable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccordingly, it is submitted alternatively that the expenses should be allowed @ 50% considering the decision of Rajendra P. Jain vs. DCIT cited supra. 29. In view of the above submission, the assessment framed u/s 153C may please be quashed and/or addition in excess of declared income may please be deleted." 18. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue submitted that search was conducted on 03.10.2013 for which the relevant assessment year is, assessment year 2014-15 and the previous assessment year is 2013-14 would be applicable to the assessee for the year under consideration, therefore prior to assessment year 2013-14, the six assessment years extended up to the assessment year 2008-09. Therefore, assessment year 2008-09 is also covered within the ambit of six previous years. Hence, Ld DR pointed out that assessment year 2008-09 should not be excluded from the purview of the preceding six assessment years. The ld DR also pointed out that satisfaction note recorded by the assessing officer under section 153C is a common satisfaction note and this satisfaction note is in accordance with law, therefore additional ground raised by the assessee may be dismissed. 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en drive which needs investigation (b) Description of the seized material (c) Address of premise/place from where such material was seized C-301, Shefield Apartment, Anand Nagar, Opp.Jarimari Garden, C S Road, Dahisar(E ), Mumbai-400 068 (d) Date of seizure of such material 04.10.2013 (e) Particulars of the relevant panchanama Panchnama Dated 05.10.2013 (f) Annexure/Sr.No./Page no. etc.,(particulars to be specified) Anneexure-A & Annex.-A-I 6. Relationship of the person referred in S.No.4 with the person referred to in S.No.2 As stated in point 7 below 7. Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer of the person referred to in section 153A that the seized material referred to in S.No. 5 belong to the person referred to in S.No.4 During the course of search action in the case of Dharmichand Jain Group, it is revealed that group of companies has indulged as the groups in giving accommodation entries. The seizure made at place of Dharmichand Jain, C-301,Shefield Apartment, Anand Nagar, Opp. Jarimari Garden, C S Road,,Dahisar (E), Mumbai-400 068 comprises of loose paper folder & one Pen drive which contains details of group companies inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on the Judgment of Hon`ble High Court of Delhi in the case of RRJ Securities Limited 62 taxmann.com 391(Delhi), wherein the Hon`ble Court held as follows: "21. As discussed hereinbefore, once the AO of the searched person is satisfied that the seized assets/documents belong to another person and the said assets/documents have been transferred to the AO of such other person, the proceedings for assessment/reassessment of income of the other person has to proceed in accordance with provisions of Section 153A of the Act. Section 153A requires that where a search has been initiated under Section 132 of the Act, the AO is required to issue notice requiring the noticee to furnish returns of income in respect of six assessment years relevant to the six previous years preceding the previous year in which the search is conducted. As discussed hereinbefore, by virtue of second proviso to Section 153A, the assessment/reassessment pending on the date of initiation of search abate. In the context of proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, the reference to the date of initiation of the search in the second proviso to Section 153A has to be construed as the date on which the AO receiv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the AO 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." v. 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 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. 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 AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record of the AO. vii. Completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under Section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the date of recording of satisfaction by the AO of the searched person. It is contended by the Revenue that the relevant six assessment years would be the assessment years prior to the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted. If this interpretation as canvassed by the Revenue is accepted, it would mean that whereas in case of a person searched, assessments in relation to six previous years preceding the year in which the search takes place can be reopened but in case of any other person, who is not searched but his assets are seized from the searched person, the period for which the assessments could be reopened would be much beyond the period of six years. This is so because the date of handing over of assets/documents of a person, other than the searched person, to the AO would be subsequent to the date of the search. This, in our view, would be contrary to the scheme of Section 153C(1) of the Act, which construes the date of receipt of assets and documents by the AO of the Assessee (other than one searched) as the date of the search on the Assessee. The rationale appears to be that whereas in the case of a searched person the AO of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the AO shall assess or re- assess the total income of six AYs immediately preceding the AY relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted. The second proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 153 A of the Act, states that assessment or re- assessment relating to any AY falling within the period of six AYs referred to in the said sub-section pending on the date of initiation of the search under Section 132, would abate. 6. The case of the Revenue is that the first proviso to Section 153C refers only to the second proviso to Section 153A(1) of the Act, which only indicates that any assessment relating to any AY falling within the period of six AYs which is pending as of the initiation of search shall abate. Therefore, the second proviso to Section 153C is also concerned only with the aspect of abatement of pending assessments. According to the Revenue, this makes no difference to the computation of the block of six years preceding the AY relevant to the previous year /in which the search was conducted. In other words, according to the Revenue, the block period for both the searched person and the 'other person' would remain the same notwithstanding tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, the assessment/reassessment pending on the date on which the assets/documents are received by the AO would abate. In respect of such assessments which have abated, the AO would have the jurisdiction to proceed and make an assessment. However, in respect of concluded assessments, the AO would assume jurisdiction to reassess provided that the assets/documents received by the AO represent or indicate any undisclosed income or possibility of any income that may have remained undisclosed in the relevant assessment years...... 24. As discussed hereinbefore, in terms of proviso to Section 153C of the Act, a reference to the date of the search under the second proviso to Section 153A of the Act has to be construed as the date of handing over of assets/documents belonging to the Assessee (being the person other than the one searched) to the AO having jurisdiction to assess the said Assessee. Further proceedings, by virtue of Section 153C(1) of the Act, would have to be in accordance with Section 153A of the Act and the reference to the date of search would have to be construed as the reference to the date of recording of satisfaction. It....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isfaction- note, such as satisfaction- note, is recorded by AO after Fifteen Months and Thirteen days, combined satisfaction -note is invalid, and there is no incriminating material found during the search etc. are hereby rejected. As we have noted that during the course of search action in the case of Dharmichand Jain Group, it is revealed that group of companies has indulged in giving accommodation entries. The seizure made at place of Dharmichand Jain, C-301, Shefield Apartment, Anand Nagar, Opp. Jarimari Garden, C S Road, Dahisar (E), Mumbai-400 068 comprises of loose paper folder & one Pen drive which contains details of group companies including details belonging to M/s Maniprabha Impex, Kangan Jewels Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Dharam Impex. Looking at the nature of the transactions, the seized materials carry a clear implication over the income of the assessee. We note that loose papers and pen drive are incriminating material. There is no prohibition in the Act that a combined satisfaction-note should not be recorded. Moreover, the satisfaction- note, is recorded by Assessing Officer after fifteen months and thirteen days, which is normal time the Department takes to issue satisfact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tal imports, local sales, loan entries, as follows: Sales Amount Rate of commission Commission income Total turnover 60,27,08,000/- Total import 13,63,50,150/- Total turnover (excluding import & group turnover) 44,63,30,059/- @ 0.02% 89,266/- Import made 13,63,50,150/- @ 0.20% 2,72,700/- Loan outstanding at year end 2,84,91,894/- @ 0.50% 1,42,459/- Total commission income earned 5,04,425/- Deduction of expenses of 25% is given for paper transactions & related cos as the such. 1,26,106/- Income assessed 3,78,319/- Thus, as per the above working, we note that Assessing Officer also allowed deduction of expenses at the rate of 25% for paper transactions and related costs, hence we note that assessing officer passed reasoned and speaking order therefore assessee does not deserve further relief, therefore, we dismiss all the appeals of these assessees` on merit. 32. On the identical facts, on merits the issue is covered against the assessee by the Judgment of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Sh Rajendra Sohan Lal Jain, in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5, the assessee was asked to explain the modus operandi of his business. The AO prepared the diagram of modus operandi disclosed by the assessee. The AO on the basis of incriminating material gathered during the search action and on the basis of statement of Rajendra Jain and his associates held that all the business concerns of the assessee were merely doing paper transaction, instead of carrying any real business, those concern were doing of maintaining 'books of accounts' and do not carry any actual or physical business of diamonds. It was held by AO that the actual importers of rough diamonds approach assessee to import their diamonds through his group and on receipt of consignment, the real importer get the delivery of diamonds after clearance from CHA (clearance house agent). The books of stock of rough diamonds have been converted by assessee group to cut and polished diamonds through commission companies or through name landing concern, issues bill of rough diamonds to local purchasers and show purchase of polished diamonds from them. On receipt of sale proceed; this group makes import remittance at the request of importer. Further, the AO on the basis of discloser of asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the correspondence of orders were found not placed by the assessee and his group to the foreign parties. Besides, books of account of various concerns was maintained by assessee, which the assessee himself said being run by him in the name of various persons, which he able to get them to his residence from Surat, during the search though Sachin Parikh, who is his accomplice. A pen drive containing accounts from various concerns including those where Rajendra Jain as per ownership had no interest was also provided by the assessee. All these facts and evidence clearly prove with the corroborative evidence recovered during the search action that assessee was indulging in providing accommodation entry. All these aforesaid evidence and corroborative facts found during the search are incriminating material. The ld CIT(A) also recorded that not a single piece of diamond found during the search action. Further, from the admission of assessee, Sachin Pareek and Surendra Jain in their statement and identification of actual beneficiary of import and delivery of diamonds by actual beneficiary and e-mail found to actual beneficiary, the ld CIT(A) concluded that assessee and his group was provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... affair carried out by him with his associate for providing bogus entry, mere obitor in case of beneficiary by the Coordinate bench, will not absolve the assessee from his own admission. The finding of Tribunal in Manoj Begani vs. ACIT(supra) is based on the facts and evidences produced by that assessee. Therefore, in view of the abovesaid discussions, we are in full agreement with the finding of ld CIT(A) that once the books are rejected the profit is to be estimated on the basis of commission rates and net profit is to be determined. We also affirms the finding of ld CIT(A) that that when the actual business of assessee was importing goods for others and in the books credit in the name of exporters, thus exchange rate difference is not payable by the assessee and the assessee is not eligible for deduction of such exchange rate fluctuation. Even otherwise, no evidence is filed by the assessee on record to prove the fact that the assessee entered into hedging contract with the Banker, the evidence found in the form of email and other evidences show the facts otherwise. Therefore, the submissions made by the assessee do not inspire confidence. None of the case laws relied by the ld ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asons, we dismiss other appeals of the assessees, on merit in terms of directions noted in IT(SS)A No.312/AHD/2017 (supra). 35. In the result, appeals filed by the assessees (M/s Kanagan Jewells Pvt. Ltd.) in IT(SS)A Nos. 288 to 293/Ahd/2017, IT(SS)A No.307 to 311/Ahd/2017 and ITA No.1579/Ahd/2017 (M/s Maniprabha Impex Pvt. Ltd.); IT(SS)A No.313 to 317/Ahd/2017 and ITA No.1580/Ahd/2017 (M/s Dharam Impex) are dismissed. 36. In combined result, IT(SS)A No.306/AHD/2017 and IT(SS)A No.312/AHD/2017 of assessee's appeals are allowed whereas remaining eighteen (18) appeals of assessee are dismissed. A copy of the instant common order be placed in the respective case file(s). Order is pronounced on 29/08/2022 by placing result on Notice Board. ============= Document 1 कारà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤²à¤¯/OFFICE OF THE सहायक आयकर आयà¥à¤•à¥à¤¤/ ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. केनà¥à¤¦à¥à¤°à¥€à¤¯ वरà¥à¤¤à¥à¤² 4, सà¥à¤°à¤¤ / CENTRAL CIRCLE 4, SURAT. कमरा न. 508. आय....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....की छः निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ वरà¥à¤·à¥‹ की अरà¥à¤¥à¤¾à¤¤à¥ निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ वरà¥à¤· 2008-09 से निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ वरà¥à¤· 2013-14 की आय का निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£/पून: निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ किया जाना है। अतः आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 153 सी के अंतरà¥à¤—त निरà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤°à¤£ वरà¥à¤· A y. 2009-10 की आय से संबंधित रिटरà¥à¤¨ पà¥à¤°à¤¸à¥à¤¤à¥à¤¤ करें। रिटरà¥à¤¨ आयकर नियम 1962 क....