TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 200
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., reads as under:- Grounds of appeal Tax effect relating to each Ground of appeal 1. The learned CIT(A)-11, Pune, has erred in law and on facts in adjudicating the appeal without jurisdiction as the appeal fell within the jurisdiction of CIT (A), Ahmedabad. Rs. 13,90,500/- 2 The learned CIT(A)-11, Pune, has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 49,00,000/- added as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act by the AO. Rs. 13,90,500/- 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) ought to have deleted the addition of Rs. 49,00,000/-. As above 4. It is therefore prayed that the addition of Rs. 49,00,000/- upheld by the CIT (A) -11, Pune may be deleted. As above 5. Your appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing. As above Total tax effect (see note below) Rs. 13,90,500/- 3. At the outset , it is observed that this appeal is filed late by assessee beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3) of the 1961 Act. This appeal is filed belatedly by 44 days. The assessee has filed an application supported by an affidavit d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Premises of M/s New India Angadia Service Branch at Shop No 2. Building No 3-213 Gazipura, Kalaburagi. The Head Office of the assessee is at Ahmedabad. During the search operation conducted by Police on 26-03- 2015 , the Police seized cash of Rs. 70,15,390/-, jewellery weighing 102.86 gms. valued at Rs 2,50,000/- (approx.) and certain documents from the employees of assessee firm M/s New India Angadia Service, Branch at Kalaburagi. After the preliminary inquiry, the Police passed on information to the Income Tax Department. The ACIT Circle-1, Kalaburagin commissioned the inquiry, and recorded statements of (i) Shri Santosh Laxman Bokade(employee), (ii) Shri Popat Chandrakant Dhumal (employee) (iii) Shri Deepak Kisam Dhumal (employee), (iv) Shri Shankar Gopal Bhosle (employee) and (v) Shri Tippanna Gundappa Ummragi ( person present when the police conducted search). On the basis of information provided by Police , requisition u/s 132A was issued in the name of New India Angadia Service , Branch at Shop No 2. Building 3-213, Gazipura Kalaburagin, requisitioning him to handover the Cash Jewellery & Documents. The Police handed over same to income-tax department , on 30- 03-2015. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at that time he was under pressure and in tension. The assessee enclosed the copy of Rojmel of Gulbarga Branch from 25.03.2015 to 31.03.2015 . The assessee also produce original Rojmel of Gulbarga Branch and Ahmedabad Branch for the year 2014-15. 4.6 The assessee further submitted before AO that the assessee had transferred, for its business purposes, accounted cash on hand at their Ahmedabad office of Rs. 49,00,000/- out of their net cash balance of Rs. 1,03,64,225/- on 23.03.2015 , which was received by their Gulbarga branch on 25.03.2015 . The assesas further submitted before AO that looking to their business , it is their business policy to maintain such huge cash balance and such cash is not maintained 2 or 3 months before the search was conducted but maintained since long time . It was further submitted by assessee before that opening cash balance as on 01-04-2014 was Rs 78,05,452/-, and hence it could not be said this huge cash balance was not fabricated or adjusted after the search took place. 4.7 The AO after considering the replies of the assessee observed that the Managing Partner, Sh. Ratilal Patel in his statement dated 09-04-2015 had admitted about the cash seiz....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee filed first appeal before ld. CIT(A) which was partly allowed by ld. CIT(A) wherein the contentions of the assessee that Rs. 21,10,000/- of the cash found and seized were duly declared in the return of income and taxes were paid were accepted by the ld. CIT(A) as had led to double additions, while the balance addition of Rs. 49,00,000/- was confirmed by ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) did not accept the retraction from admission being made by the Managing Partner of the assessee , surrendering income of Rs. 70,10,000/- being cash seized by Police on 26.03.2015 in the hands of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) relied to the order of ITAT, Pune Bench in the case of Hotel Kiran v. ACIT (2002) 82 ITD 453 (Pune) and the judgment ; order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT (2013) 31 taxman.com 274(Del. HC; the judgment and order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sudarshan P. Amin v. ACIT (2013) (Tax Appeal No. 386/2012) ; judgment and order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. M.S. Aggarwal (2018) 93 taxman.com 247 (Delhi) and judgment and order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bannalal Jat Constructions (P) Ltd. v. ACIT (2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reasons have been given for transferring such huge amount of cash from Ahmedabad(Gujarat) to Gulbarga(Karnataka) in cash and not through banking channel. The assessee simply surrendered the unaccounted cash found at the time of search at Kalaburgi office in order to stop further inquiries , and later the transfer entries were made in the books of accounts regarding transfer of cash from Ahrmdabad to Kalaburgi. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the retraction of disclosure of unaccounted cash seized , as was done by the assessee after 21 months. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that out of Rs. 70,10,000/- surrendered by the assessee , an amount of Rs. 21,10,000/- was itself declared as income by the assessee in the return of income filed with the Department and hence the it will lead to double addition of the same income, the addition was upheld to the tune of balance amount of Rs. 49,00,000/- by ld. CIT(A) as an unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act, vide appellate order dated 16th June, 2022. 6. Aggrieved by the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed second appeal with Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee Shri K.C. Thaker, Advocate opened arguments before the Benc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oyees were recorded on 30th March, 2015 but no copies were provided by Department of the statement recorded of the employees. It was submitted that the assessee has not demanded the copies of statement of employees recorded by Department. It was also not relied upon by the department , while framing assessment. Written submissions dated 05.08.2019 were filed before ld. CIT(A) on 14th August, 2019(Page 3/PB). It was submitted further written submissions were filed by assessee before ld. CIT(A) on 21.10.2019 (Page 1-2/PB). The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the orders of Hon'ble ITAT, Nagpur Bench in the case of Progressive Carriers reported in (2018) 53 CCH 0137(Nag.Trib.); Judgment and order of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Chetnaben J. Shah v. ITO (Tax Appeal No. 1437/2007). The ld. counsel for the assessee also relied upon the judgment and Order of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Pr. CIT v. Nageshwar Enterprises(2020) 421 ITR 388(Guj. HC). 6.4 The ld. Departmental Representative, Shri Ravindra , Sr. DR on the other hand relied upon the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A). 7. We have considered rival contentions and perused the material on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o in the absence of free and peaceful mind, he simply accepted seized cash of Rs. 70,10,000/- for tax purpose under full mental pressure even though there was a sufficient cash balance in books of accounts since from the first day of accounting year. Thus, the assessee retracted from the surrender of Rs. 49,00,000/- out of Rs. 70,10,000/- made by it on 09.04.2015, while surrender of Rs. 21,10,000/- was honoured by the assessee by offering to tax the said amount as income in the return of income filed with the department. The AO made total addition of Rs. 70,10,000/-, while ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition so far as Rs. 21,10,000/- offered for tax by the assessee itself in the return of income filed for the impugned assessment year, while addition of Rs. 49,00,000/- was confirmed by ld. CIT(A) by rejecting the retraction made by the assessee being made belatedly after 21 months of making surrender of income . It is observed that cash of Rs. 70,15,390/- was found from the Kalaburgi(Gulberga) , Karnataka branch , of the assessee on 26.03.2015 when search by Police took place. There were four employees and one person present in the said branch office. They could not offer proper explana....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and hence the said cash is to be treated as explained cash. The assessee is claiming that it had cash of Rs. 1,08,61,505/- as on 23.03.2015 at Ahmedabad. The Rojmel(Ahmedabad) from 19.03.2015 to 24.03.2015 is submitted during assessment proceedings, but the same was not submitted during search on 26.03.2015 nor submitted on 09.04.2015 when statement of Mr. Ratilal Patel , Managing Partner was recorded. The opening balance of cash as on 19.03.2015 was 1,18,58,865/- is reflected, but no details as to how such huge cash was built up over a period of time, reasons for holding such a huge cash and that too at a place like Ahmedabad which has a very developed banking system/network could not be explained by the assessee, rather there is an admission by the Managing Partner, Mr. Ratilal Patel on 09.04.2005 in statement on oath recorded u/s 131, that the assessee is transporting cash for other for commission. What is the need for transporting cash for others on commission, when India is now well connected with the banking system and there is a robust internet banking facility available, obviously it was done to transport unaccounted money of the others. The assessee has claimed that they w....