AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (10) TMI 816
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r any of the ground of appeal, if need be." 2. The fact in brief is that assessee has filed return of income declaring total income of Rs.13,74,929/- on 30.07.2013. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the case of Dev Land & Housing (DLH) Group on 10.12.2013 and residential premises of the assessee was also covered in search action. During the course of search what'sapp message were found in the mobile phone of the assessee regarding communication of investment made in cash. The statement of the assessee was recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act on 10.12.2013 wherein he stated that cash of Rs.3.61 crores had been given to him by Shri Vijay T. Thakkar chairman of DLH Group for investment. However, Shri Vijay T. Thakkar had denied of giving any cash amount to the assessee. On the basis of aforesaid information, the A.O recorded reason that income chargeable to tax to the amount of Rs.3.61 crores had escaped assessment in the hand of the assessee pertaining to the assessment year 2013-14. Accordingly, a notie u/s 148 of the Act on 20.12.2016 was issued to the assessee. During the course of reassessment proceedings the assessee had made submission that he had given loan of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d at least 60 lacs every month till 1.7.13 (starting with 30 to me 1.13) when you shall make a balloon payment. It's not a joke and I'm very serious. Hence stick to what you stated and confirmed without a change. Be a man of words. 10:23PM, 3 Apr - V.K. Takkar : Being your biggest investor, I definitely expect huge priority in how you deal with me & my payments. 10:28PM, 3 Apr - V.K. Takkar: I have given you Amounts which you had not ever seen in your entire life from any other person. What have you paid me in return ? ZERO ! 10:36PM, 3 Apr - V.K. Takkar : Hence, make payments to us as already committed by you. No after thoughts permitted when you are sitting away. 10:53PM, 3 Apr - V.K. Takkar : Sandeep ji and Devnani ji May also like to express their views. 7:01AM, 4 Apr - Sandeep Srivastva Kandivali: I entirely agree with Vijayji. Karan has to honour his words. Work hard n remit the Ami as decided. There is no discussion on that anymore. 8:48AM, 4 Apr - Devnani Vaibhavji 112:1 entirely agree with Vijaykumar ji and Sandeep ji as we have been pushed into a mess by Karan for no fault of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Q. 14 How do you know Mr. Karan Dodani and Mrs. Shweta ? Ans. They were introduced to me by a common friend, Mr. Sandeep Srivastava, Ex- Indian Naval Officer who stays in kandivali. Q. 15 Have you made any financial transaction with Karan Dodani? Where does he stay? Ans. On Mr. Sandeep Srivastava's , Karan's and Shweta's joint insistence, persuasion and assurances of decent timely returns to me on my loan investments made with them, I got lured to lend monies to them. They paid the partial returns by cheque for some initial time. But thereafter, they stopped picking up our phone calls and became very difficult to contact. They even closed their office in Andheri (W), their last known address to me To the best of my knowledge, they are absconding from India. Karan's parent's house is in Bandra. To my last gathered knowledge, he should be in Dubai. Q. 16 As you said that were lured by the attractive rate of interest offered by Karan Dodani, please state how much was the rate of interest promised by him and in which business he was indulged in? Ans. Karan Dodani had promised to give 15% returns per month on my inv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat you do not have any of their addresses. Please confirm. Ans. I could not recall this email. However, since you have showed this mail to me. I heartily accept that this mail was duly received by me. Whatever address -they have mentioned share with you that their latest possible address may have been posted by them on a new website which they have created .alter fleeing to Dubai. . [email protected] is private email address of my Advocate, Mr. Nirmal Devnani, whom I keep posted from time to time with a view to launch criminal case against these cheaters without letting them (Karan and Shweta) know. Q. 22 Do you keep receiving any kind of communication from Karan or Shweta (ARACELIA) in the form of account statement/usage of your funds/profit earned monthly? Ans. No such communication has ever been received by me from them. They don't consider themselves accountable to us. Q. 23 Have you ever opened any account with Karan's Company in Dubai against which any User ID was issued to you? Ans. No account was ever opened with Karan's Company in Dubai and there was no issue of any User ID in the that case. I d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4). I do not have any relation with the cash component of Rs. 3.61 crores and the interest earned there on whatsoever as this entire cash component belongs to Shri Vijay Thakkar of DLH. Hence, the amount of Capital investments of Rs. 5.76 crores mentioned by me in the whatsapp conversation do not wholly belongs to me. This is as per the bifurcation just explained by me. Q.26 When was the money invested with Karan /Shweta? Ans. As stated my whatsapp conversation, these entire transactions took place between july to December, 2012. Q.27 What all do you know about Karan Dodani and Shweta Grover? Please furnish their PAN details, residence, office address and other whereabouts? Ans. Karan's full name is Karan Mohan Dodani and his passport no. is G3668500 issued on 14.06.2007. In 2012, he was residing at 234/7, Gulmohur Building. 28th Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai-50. His PAN is AJCPD0527E. Mrs. Shweta Ramesh Grover is his wife. Her passport no. is F7631643 issued on 21.04.2006. In 2012, she was residing with her parents at A-704, Vaibhav V Palace, New Link Road, Oshiwara, Jogeshwari (w), Mumbai. They had promoted a company in India b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Regulations as well. Although they appeared to give legitimate colour to their business while collecting money from their clients. Opportunity to take rest was offered to the deponent which was accepted by him. The statement is hereby temporarily concluded at 10.30 PM on 11.12.2013. 6.9 Various aspects of the investment made by the assessee which come out of the statement given by the assessee is summarized below: i. The assessee was a victim of a ponzi scheme wherein he was promised a very high rate of return by two individuals Karan Dodani and Shweta Grover Dodani by making investment in forex trade. The business was to be carried out in Dubai with additional investment to be sourced by these persons. The assessee has cited in the statement (Q No. 16) that he was promised a return of 15% per month. ii. The total investment at the time of whatsapp communication on 3.4 2013 was Rs 5.76 crore. The appellant had received certain amounts as return from these two persons and these amounts had been duly offered to tax in earlier years. iii. There is evidence of an investment of Rs 1.65 crore by the assessee and Rs 50 lakh by his wife in the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....complaint made before Bombay Police/Economic Offences Wing as well as cases filed before Bombay High Court on the issue. The appellant has filed a copy of the decision of the Bombay Sessions Court refusing anticipatory bail to the parents of Shweta Grover Dodani and the order of the Bombay High Court with respect to appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Sessions Court in connection with the fraud committed by the Dodanis against various investors. 6.13 The following observations of the Sessions Court and Bombay High Court are relevant to the issue: Bombay High Court in their order dated 27th July 2015 "3........ By July 2012, complainant had invested about Rs. 1,65,00,000/- and his wife had invested Rs 50,00,000/-. During the period November 2012 to March 2013, Karan had deposited Rs.11,54,750/- In his account and Rs 4,52,500/- in the account of his wife Niraja. From January 2013, all the persons above mentioned were evading to meet the complainant. He made enquiries. He had contacted the present applicants also on various occasions, however, they evaded to give him proper answers. Complainant and other investors requested Karan and Shweta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs 3.61 crore and that this amount represented interest accrued on the basic amount of Rs 2.15 crore which had been invested with Dodanis in cheque. It was the appellant's claim that since the Dodanis had promised a return of 15% per month to be paid to the appellant every month but had not paid the amount to him, this amount was added to the outstanding capital. The assessee has provided a computation to demonstrate that on computing the interest at 15% compounded monthly, the figure exactly matches with the amount of Rs 5.76 crore. The AO refused to accept the fresh explanation filed by the assessee before him by holding that the explanation appeared to be an after-though after Vijay Thakkar had disowned the transaction. It was also been pointed out by the AO that a return of 15% per month is not available in the market and cannot be believed to be true. He accordingly relied on the original, statement of the assessee to treat the balance amount as unexplained. 6.15 The moot point to be decided here is whether the original statement of the assessee needs to be relied upon or the revised explanation filed through an affidavit needs to be relied upon in order to arriv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the source of Rs.3.61 crore was not correctly divulged. The AO has been swayed by the words used in the whatsapp message that the capital contribution of the assessee with Dodanis was Rs 5.67 crore. However, keeping in view that the rate of return on the original amount was also mentioned in the same statement and a monthly return of Rs.30 lakh was also mentioned in the whatsapp message which corresponds to a capital amount of Rs.2.15 crore, the claim of the appellant that the remaining amount represented accrued interest on original capital is found to be convincing. It is a normal practice to include the accrued interest while computing an outstanding amount with a debtor while trying to force a recovery which the assessee has also adopted. 6.17 It is also noted that there is sufficient evidence on record in form of the findings of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and the Sessions Court of Bombay as well as findings of the EOW which are noted by the Court while deciding the anticipatory bait of the parents of Shweta Dodani that Karan/Shweta Dodani were running a ponzi scheme to defraud gullible investors and the assessee, in his greed, was a victim of such scheme. Su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ement immediately on 14.12.2013. The ld. A.R further submitted that assessee was cheated by the Karan/Shweta under the Ponzie scheme which is evident from the F.I.R. and proceedings in the Hon'ble Bombay High Court launched against the accused parties. 5. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The assessee was an independent director of a company namely M/s Dev Land And Holding Pvt. Ltd. the said company was subject to search action u/s 132 of the Act on 10.12.2013. The residential premises of the assessee was also searched. During the course of search action the assessee was confronted with the following what'sapp conversation: "Q25. You had stated in the answer to your question 17 of this statement that you had invested a total sum of Rs. 2,15,00,000/- with Koran / Shweta as per your books. Now please refer to the following Whatsapp conversation (Annexure-2) : (4th April, 4.23 pm) VK Takkar : my preliminary observation on the limited trading account statements sent by Koran from August, 2012 to March 2013 : Against my capital investment to him of Rs.5.76 crores from July to December, 2012, he has deposited only Rs.3.95 crores into t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng that he was not in proper frame of mind because of prolonged search proceeding from 7.00AM on 10.12.2013 to late midnight on 13.12.2013. The assessee has duly explained that the what'sapp message actually meant that break up of total sum of Rs.5.76 crores were recoverable/due from Karan/Shweta, the break-up of which was Rs.2.15 crores i.e the principal amount and Rs.3.61 crores i.e defaulted/defrauded interest @ 15% per month compounded monthly (on principal of Rs.2.15 crores). It was also explained that Karan/Shweta with whom the amount was deposited had committed fraud and fled to UAE after defrauding also a number of other investors. The interest component was added to the principal amount totaling to Rs.5.76 crores to build up pressure on the investee through the what'sapp message. The assessee had also explained before the lower authorities about the exact detail of amount mentioned in the what'sapp message which is reproduced as under: Particulars Amount in INR Amount in INR Initial Capital Investment (also duly reflected in Tally Books of Account even before the time of IT search from 10 Dec 2013 to 13 Dec 2013) made by Appellant and Appellant's wife ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rused the above referred decision and find that the facts of the case of the assessee are distinguishable from the referred case. In that case the assessee had not substantiated his retraction of the statement with any evidence, however, in the case of the assessee he has substantiated his retraction of statement with relevant supporting evidences i.e breakup of principal amount of Rs.2.15 crores, defaulted interest @ 15% compounded to Rs.3.61 crores, evidence of Ponzi Scheme run by Karan/Shweta, filing of FIR with the Bombay Police & Economic Office Wing, Hon'ble Bombay High Court order dated 27.07.2015, Session Court order dated 12.12.2015, reporting of investment made in books of account and return of income filed by the assessee, etc. The aforesaid specific facts and evidences also distinguish the case of assessee from the case of Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 applied by the A.O without disproving the specific supporting evidences existed in the case of the assessee. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M. Narayan N. Boos. Vs. ACIT, Circle (339 ITR 192) held that addition made by the A.O merely on the basis of retracted statement u/s 132(4) could not be ....