TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 1414
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 2. Since, the issues involved in all the appeals are common and identical; 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 ITA No.347/AHD/2017, for assessment year 2009-10 have been taken into consideration for deciding the above appeals en masse. 3. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in lead case in IT(SS)A No. 347/AHD/2017 for assessment year 2009-10, wherein the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: "Grounds of appeal against the order dated 21/03/2017 u/s 250 of the Act passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-4, Surat. 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in upholding the validity of notice issued u/s 153C of the I.T. Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "The Act") without appreciating the fact that provisions of sec 153C are neither applicable nor complied with as mandated in sec 153C of the Act. Therefore, the Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the impugned assessment order. 2. The le....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the assessment of Rs.12,08,834/- as alleged commission on sales, import purchase and loan for acting as accommodation bills providers merely on the basis of statement of the third party recorded u/s 132(4) without appreciating the fact that alleged statements have already been retracted and corroborative evidences filed in support of regular business activity. 8. Without prejudice to Ground no.5,6 and 7, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in law and in facts in not accepting the claim of the appellant that statement recorded u/s 132(4) in search action of Rajendra Jain ought to be read in totality in respect of income from alleged commission that has already been included in sales transaction disclosed in audited accounts as admitted in the same statement, hence no further addition ought to be confirmed on account of alleged commission in the impugned assessment order. 9. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the rejection of books of account of the appellant without appreciating the fact ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rn in which Rajendra Jain & Surendra Jain has done accommodation entries. This requires detailed investigation. Due to these facts involved in the case, the case requires to be covered with the provisions of section 153C of the Act. Therefore, a notice u/s 153C of the I.T. Act was issued to the assessee on 13.01.2015 and duly served upon the assessee. In response to the said notice, the assessee furnished copy of his original return of income (ROI) on 16.02.2015 declaring total income at Rs.3,82,260/-. 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. A notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 15.06.2015 and subsequently, a questionnaire and notices u/s 142(1) were issued to the assessee. 5. During the search, various evidences were collected, which explained inter alia, the modus operandi of the "business of providing accommodation entries in the nature of bogus sales and unsecured loans". During the search proceedings, it was established by evidences and statements of Shri Rajendra Jain, Surendra Jain, Shri Sanjay Choudhary and Shri Dharmichand Jain that there group concerns are: (i) Engaged in me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been converted by these concerns to cut and polished diamonds through their commission companies. Or sometimes these name lending concerns issue bills of rough diamonds to local purchasers and show purchase of polish diamonds from them to square up the transaction. (v) On receipt of such cut and polished diamonds, they issue sale bills to various parties at the request of the actual importers. The actual importer arranges the sale proceeds from parties to whom sale bills were issued. Once the sale proceeds are received, these name lending concerns makes import remittance at the request of importer. 7. During the course of search and seizure action statement of Shri Sachin Pareek (Prop, of Arihant Exports, Director of Karnawat Impex Pvt. Ltd. and Moulimani Impex Pvt. Ltd., Shri Manish Sushil Jain (Prop, of Kalash Enterprises, Director of M/s. Kriya Impex Pvt. Ltd. and Karnawat Impex Pvt. Ltd.) and Shri Anoop Y. Jain (Prop, of Aadi Impex) have also been recorded on oath. All the above persons in their statement admitted that they were acting as per the directions of their bosses, namely, Shri Rajendra Jain and Shri Surendra Jain, for which they were getting salary. Hence,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r from turnover) 3. This fact remain to be of great importance that during the entire search and survey wherein all the known/declared premises of the Group were covered, were found to be with not even a single piece of diamond and as per books there was stock. Means no stock was found with any of the company/entity at any of the premises. This very fact points out and confirm all concerns of the group were indulged into the activities of providing paper entries and no factual business of Diamond was undertaken by them. 4. The search and survey teams also found that each of these concerns had email Ids and the backup of these e-mail messages also corroborates this modus operandi of the group in respect of giving entries of bogus purchases and unsecured loans. Evidences of actual importers -who used to procure diamonds through these concerns of the Group were also found from the e-mail correspondences. 5. From the above facts it is clear that your books of a/c is not correct, so you are requested to explain as to why the books should not be rejected u/s 145(3) of the Act and why the income calculated on the basis of commission actually received on various ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hority. Sales Tax authority has also accepted sales/ purchases of the assessee while scrutinizing the accounts in scrutiny assessment of sales tax. Relevant evidences are being submitted here in above. 1.4 Section 145 deals with method of accounting and rejection of books of accounts. The section read as under: "145(1) Income Chargeable under the head "profit and gains of business or profession" or "income from other sources" shall, subject to the provisions of subsection (2), be computed in accordance with either cash or mercantile system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee. (2) The Central Government may notify in the Official Gazette from time to time accounting standards to be followed by any class of assesses or in respect of any class of income. (3) Where the Assessing Officer is not satisfied about the correctness of the accounts of the assessee, or where the method of accounting provided in subsection (1) or accounting standards as notified under sub section (2), have not been regularly followed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer may make an assessment in the manner provided in Section 144. Therefore, it is submitted that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n some of cases. Diamonds merchants (our business friends) engaged in diamonds business for years in diamonds market, used to give our reference to overseas party for timely payment by us to them, since we do not do not know them . Therefore in those case, whenever we remit money for import, we send copy to such party who gave our reference that we meet our commitment for payment to them. This email ids do not prove that we procures diamonds on behalf of parties to whom we send message for timely payment of remittance to overseas party. Investigation wing did not find any actual importers who admitted that we have imported goods on their behalf. There is no other material /facts available on record to indicate that real importers are different than us. Even your good office has also verified from custom authority regarding import being made by us by collecting information u/s 133(6) of the Act. Therefore we pray that books of account u/s 145(3) can not be rejected on this ground also." 10. However, assessing officer rejected the contention of the assessee and observed that business premises as well as residential premises were covered during search & survey proceedings. During t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered in this case. Further, it cannot be without reason that no record of any previously done/executed "jangads" was found nor brought to the notice of search team or Investigation wing during post search proceedings. As per books of accounts of the assessee and his group concern there was stock on the date of search/survey proceedings. The details are as under: STOCK POSITION CHART Sr. No. Name of the assessee Stock as on date of search Rough Diamond Polished Diamond 1. Sparsh Exports Pvt. Ltd (Director Rajendra S Jain) Nil 64.40 2. M/s Sun Diam (Partner -Rajendra S Jain) 787.64 12.73 3. Kriya Impex Pvt Ltd (Director - Rajendra S Jain) Nil 14.24 4. Kalash Enterprise (Prop. Manish S Jain) Nil Nil 5. Aadi Impex (Prop. Anoop Y Jain) 184590.04 11.72 6. Arihant Exports (Prop. Sachin Pareek) 3778.87 8.0 7. Vitrag Jewels (Prop. Mudit Karnavat) Nil Nil 8. Karnavat Impex Pvt Ltd .(Director Rajendra S Jain) Nil 26.92 9. Mouliamani Impex Pvt Ltd. (Director Rajendra S Jain) Nil Nil 10. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r section 132(4) is on a different footing. The Legislature in its wisdom has provided that such a statement may be used as evidence in any proceedings under the Act. However, there are exceptions to such admission where the assessee can retract from such statement/admission. The first exception exists where such statement is made involuntarily, i.e., obtained under coercion, threat, duress, undue influence, etc. But the burden lies on the person making such allegation to prove that the statement was obtained by the aforesaid means. The second exception is where the statement has been given under some mistaken belief either of fact or of law. If he can show that the statement has been made on mistaken belief of facts, than the facts on the basis of which admission was made were incorrect. In the case of ACIT v/s Hukum Chand 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 admissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s activities are duly acknowledged by the other Government authorities like customs department, sale tax department, 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 assessee. Such finding of the department is past the event of any verification or issuance of VAT/ sales tax numbers, registration etc. by State Government or any other Authorities. In the light of all foregoing discussion, the assessing officer held that assessee is not doing act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded u/s 132(4) on 06.10.2013. He stated that he is engaged in providing accommodation entries and earned the commission on such arrangement for which assesse and other control companies are engaged. The relevant questions and answers of the statement recorded u/s 132(4) are as under : Q5. Kindly specify the nature of present occupation /business of yours. Ans. I am engaged in the business of import, export as well as local trading of rough and polished diamonds. Q12. It has come to the notice that your employees are also running their independent proprietorship concerns of their own. Do you know? If yes, please explain as to how they do justice with the roles and responsibilities assigned to them by you. Ans. Sir, in fact, the proprietory concerns in the names of our employees are not independent business activity of their own. When I was working for Shri Ratanlal Jain, besides other concerns, he had been also operating through M/s Minar Gems, a proprietory concern in my name. So, after quitting the job, I took the idea of operating through various concerns including several proprietorship concerns in the names of our employees. In such a case. t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly by filing the affidavit before the assessing officer. In the course of assessment proceedings, assessee filed submission vide letters dated 11.10.2015, 26.12.2015 and 28.12.2015 in response to notice issued u/s 142(1) and show cause notice. 3. The notice u/s 153C was issued on 02.02.2015 and accordingly the date of the search is to be treated as 02.02.2015. In all the cases, the returns of income were filed before 02.02.2015 and time limit for issue of notice u/s 143(2) had already expired for all the years. So, for all the 4 years, the assessment has to be treated as completed assessment or unabated assessment. The assessee has given the separate chart giving the details of date of filing of return of income and issue of notice u/s 153C. Validity of assessment u/s 153C : 4. In ground no. 1, 2 and 3, assessee challenged the validity of the assessment made u/s 153C. The proceedings u/s 153C are initiated on the basis of the seizure of backup of the computer, mobile and 2 pen -drives in case of Rajendra Jain as narrated in satisfaction note. However, actually no such evidence was found in the course of search conducted in the case of Rajendra Jain belong....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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. 6. 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 do not belong to the assessee, the proceedings u/s 153C can be taken if such books of accounts relates or pertains to assessee. It has been held by the courts that the amendment made u/s 153C w.e.f 01.06.2015, cannot be applied retrospectively. With effect from 01.10.2014, section 153C was amended and Assessing Officer should also be satisfied that the document seized have bearing on the total income of the assessee. In assessee's case the satisfaction note wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of search of third person that has to be referred in the satisfaction note. It was stated by Rajendra Jain in reply to question no. 38 that income declared in the return of income represent the net commission income earned. So even the statement of Shri Rajendra Jain is not incriminating having bearing on undisclosed income. * CIT vs. Singhad Technical Education Society [84 taxmann.com 290] (SC) * CIT vs. Calcutta Knitwears [362 ITR 673] (SC) * PCIT vs. Munisuvrat Corporation [115 taxmann.com 265] (SC) * PCIT vs. Himanshu Chandulal Patel [108 CCH 0019] (SC) * PCIT vs. Himanshu Chandulal Patel [419 ITR 132] (Guj. HC) * Anilkumar Gopikishan Agrawal vs. ACIT [106 taxmann.com 137 ](Guj. HC) * CIT vs. Shardaben K. Modi [365 ITR 0169]( Guj. HC ) * PCIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain [432 ITR 0384] (Del. HC) * CIT vs. Renu Constructions Pvt. Ltd. [99 taxmann.com 426] (Del. HC) * CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal [70 taxmann.com 95] (Del. HC) * PCIT vs. Allied Perfumes Pvt. Ltd. [124 taxmann.com 358] (Del. HC) * PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia [82 taxmann.com 287] (Del. HC) * PCIT vs. Index Securiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th effect from 1-6-2015 would apply to search initiated on or after 1-6-2015 and, thus, it is date of search that has been considered to be relevant date for purpose of applying amended provisions of section 153C(1). Consequently, in relation to searches carried out till 31-5-2015, it is not permissible for Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction under section 153C. * CIT vs. Shardaben K. Modi [365 ITR 0169] (Guj HC) - The sole basis for issuance of notice was statement made during course of survey by son of Assessee. The reasons did not give any further details regarding amount which had been accepted by son of the assessee and how it would blind assessee. In absence of any independent material, record did not reveal how statement of son of Assessee. Any notice of reopening issued u/s 148 would be required to be tasted at touchstone of reasons recorded by assessing officer. * PCIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain [432 ITR 0384](Del. HC) - Assessment framed under section 153A on basis of a standalone statement recorded under 132(4) without reference to any other material discovered during search and seizure operations is not sustainable. * CIT vs. Renu Constructions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153 C was not met in case of Assessees. * Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT [50 taxmann.com 299](Del. HC) - Unless it is established that documents seized, whether they be photocopies or originals, do not belong to searched person, question of invoking Section 153C does not arise and mere finding of photocopies in the possession of a searched person does not necessarily mean and imply that they "belong" to the person who holds the originals. * Pepsi Co. India Holding (P.). Ltd. v. ACIT [370 ITR 295] : "In the instant case, it is nobody's case that Jaipuria Group had disclaimed those documents as belonging to them. Unless and until it is established that the documents as belonging to them. Unless and until it is established that the documents do not belong to the searched person, the provisions of section 153C do not get attracted because the very expression used in section 153C is that where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arch conducted, to investigate into the documents and/or assets seized and ascertain that they do not reflect any undisclosed income of the assessee (i.e., a person other than the one in respect of whom search conducted) for the relevant assessment years. If the seized money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing seized as handed over to the Assessing Officer of the assessee, are duly disclosed and reflected in the returns filed by the assessee, no further interference would be called for. Similarly, if the books of account/documents seized do not reflect any undisclosed income, the assessments already made cannot be interfered with. Merely because valuable articles and/or documents belonging to the assessee have been seized and handed over to the Assessing Officer of the assessee that would not necessarily require the Assessing Officer to reopen the concluded assessments and reassess the income of the assessee. Addition on account of alleged commission income : 10. Regarding ground no. 4, it is submitted that the addition is not made on the basis of incriminating documents but on the basis of the statement of Rajendra Jain. The materials indicated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... * 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 * Kimberley process certificate issued after physical inspection of good * Civil Suit against Rajendra Jain for non-payment on account of import made by * Registration certificate issued by Maharashtra and Gujarat Sale Tax Department * VAT Audit report along with VAT Challans * Import-Export Certificate issued by Director General of Foreign Trade * Invoices for purchase made from a government sponsored enterprise * Sample Bank Statement showing non-existance of any substantial cash 13. In the following cases, the purchases were held to be genuine even when the statement was given by the entry provider that he has given the accommodation entries. The reliance is placed on the following decision of tribunals : * DCIT vs. Shri Sourabh Navalkishore Garg [ITA No. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that he is earning out of the accommodation entries which were reflected in the books of accounts of respective firms and companies and offered for taxation as income in the regular return of income filed by firms/companies after taking into consideration commission on such imports. The import expenses are reflected in the Audited Books of Accounts and are supported by documents. 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. In fact, in the satisfaction note recorded u/s 153C also the audited accounts were considered to be incriminating materials. The assessing officer has made the addition on the basis of the statement of Shri Rajendra Jain where he disclosed the percentage of commission earned on providing of accommodation entries however, he also stated after allowing the commission, the net profit that was reflected in the regular books of accounts has been earned by way of commission on providing accommodation entry. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dition was made in the case of Bhanwarlal Jain as in that case the volume was more. Accordingly, it is submitted alternatively that the expenses should be allowed @ 50% considering the decision of Rajendra P. Jain vs. DCIT cited supra. 18. 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." 16. On the other hand, Learned DR for the Revenue submitted that Shri Rajendra Jain and Surendra Jain as a group, the appellant, the companies where Shri Rajendra Jain is director, the businesses in the style of firms and proprietorships in the name of the appellant and his other employees/persons controlled by him and Surendra Jain as a group were: (i) found with no physical stock of diamond at all, (ii) there were numerous e-mails including copies of some found and seized during the search and some apparently recovered from the computer during the search which clearly proved that the real beneficiaries of import of diamonds were different than in the books, (iii) there were also e-mails which proved that persons wanting accommodation entries were approaching the appellant and othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mport @0.20% and Commission on loan @ 0.50% were adjudicated by upholding the order of ld CIT(A). Learned DR for the Revenue submitted that the present appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal. We see no reasons to take any other view of the matter than the view so taken by the Division Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own group case, vide order dated 26.11.2021. In this order, the Tribunal has inter alia observed as follows: "10. We have heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative (ld AR) of the assessee and the learned Commissioner of Income Taxdepartmental representative (ld CIT-DR) for the revenue and have gone through the entire record carefully. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that investigation team was recorded the statement of assessee by pressurizing him. The assessee has already retracted the statement by filing retraction statement dated 21.10.2013 and 09.01.2014, before the assessing officer on 31.03.2014. When search was conducted the assessment for 2008-09 to 2012-13 were not pending and were already concluded either under section 143(3) or 143(1) and hence no income can be assessed unless there is incrimin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... DCIT Vs Sourabh Naval Kishore Garg (ITA No.4130/Mum/2017),  Rajinder P Jain Vs DCIT (ITA No. 296 to 298/ Mum/2018,  Manoj Begani Vs ACIT ( ITA No. 932,933,935 936/Kol/2017),  M B Jewellwrs & sons (ITA No. 1/Kol/2017). 11. On the other hand the Ld. CIT-DR for the revenue supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The ld CIT-DR for the revenue submits that during search action sufficient incriminating evidence was unearthed. The statement of assessee and his associates were recorded under section 132(4). The assessee in his statement disclosed the modus operandi of the operation of accommodation entry. During the search action the assessee confessed in his statement recorded under oath that he along with his other associate, employees and family members are operating through a number of business concern of three natures i.e. Proprietorship firm, partnership firm as well as companies in the name of various persons including his employees. For all practical purposes, he himself ensures the chain of entire business network on profit sharing basis. During the search on business premises as well as residential premises and survey on their employee it was admi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d out under section 132 and upholding the action of A.O. in making assessment under section 144 rws 153A, however, during the submissions no specific submissions was made, therefore, the corresponding ground No.1 of appeal is treated as not pressed and dismissed as such. 13. Now adverting to the Ground No. 2 to 5 which relates to the additions of commission income that such additions are not based on incriminating evidence. A search action was carried out by the revenue at the assessee group on 03.10.2013, during the search action the statement of Rajinder Jain, Dharmi Chand Jain and Sanjay Chowdhary was recorded. Consequent on the search action and evidences gathered during search and post search action, notice under section 153A was served on the assessee to file return of income. The assessee filed return in response to the said notice, but no additional income was offered. The assessing officer after serving statutory notices proceeded for assessment. During the assessment the assessing officer referred relevant part of the statement of assessee and diagram of modus operandi of business operation which was prepared during the search action, as followed by assessee and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... income and after granting deduction of expenses @ 25% on such addition made addition of Rs.18,40,602/- in the following way; Sales Amount Rate of commission, Commission income Total turnover 2,43,23,94,646/- Total Import 86,88,19,534/- Total turn over (Excluding import & group turnover) 1,47,37,83,599/- @0.02% 2,94,757/- Import made 89,88,19,534/- @0.20% 17,37,639/- Loan outstanding at year end 8,43,48,087/- @0.50% 4,21,740/- Total commission income earned 24,54,136/- Deduction of expenses of 25% is given for paper transactions & related cost as the such 6,13,534/- Income Assessed 18,40,602/- 14. Though, the AO also made various protective additions of income assessed in assessee's group concern, however, all those protective additions were deleted by the ld CIT(A). No further appeal is filed by revenue against such order in deleting the protective additions. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions of commission income on export as well as on unsecured loan. The ld CIT(A) while confirming the order of the assessing officer r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and allowance of 25% expenses the ld CIT(A) concluded that the addition made by AO is on lower side comparative to the addition in case of Bhanwar Lal Jain, who was also providing similar accommodation entry with similar modus operandi. The ld CIT(A) further held that once books are rejected, the profit is to be estimated on the basis of commission rates and net profit is to be determined. On the grievance of assessee of exchange rate difference, the ld CIT(A) held that when the actual business is importing for others and in the books credit in the name of exporters (other beneficiary), the exchange rate difference is not payable by the assessee and rejected the ground raised by the assessee. 16. Before us, the ld AR for the assessee basically made two fold submissions that no incriminating material/ evidence was recovered during the course of search and that the assessee retracted from his statement recorded by the search party and the assessee was doing real business and not engaged in providing accommodation entry. We find that during the search action more than sufficient incriminating evidence was found, which is also supported with the corroborative evidence found in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al seized during the search action on the assessee on the basis of which it is clearly proved that the assessee is in the business of entry provider. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the grounds No. 2 to 5 raised by the assessee, which we dismissed. 17. Ground No. 6 relates to alternative and without prejudice ground that the alleged commissions has already included by the assessee in his sales transaction. Considering the facts that the lower authority have categorically held that the assessee was not doing any genuine business transactions and was engaged in providing accommodation entry, books of the assessee was rejected and only very meager rate of commission income was added to the total income of the assessee, which we have already affirmed. If for the sake of assuming it is considered that the assessee was doing genuine business, thus, keeping in view of volume of transactions in his bank account, the income of assessee would be estimated many fold comparative to the commission income added by the AO. Thus, the alternative ground of appeal is also rejected. Rajendra Kumar Jain AY 2008-09 to 2014-15 IT(SS)A No. 294 to 299/SRT/2017 25 18. Ground No. 7 ....