TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 391
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t"), for the assessment year 2014-15 2. Heard and perused the record. 3. On hearing both the sides, it comes up that a search and seizure operation was carried on Three C group by the Investigation Wing, on 29.10.2013 and thereupon return by the assessee was filed in pursuance of proceedings initiated u/s 153A of the Act. The assessment order dated 28.03.2016 was passed u/s 143(3), wherein addition of Rs. 2,37,08,076/- was made towards unexplained cash of Rs. 26,75,000/- and jewellery of Rs. 2,10,33,076/-. The assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A) and vide order dated 31.08.2018, CIT(A) had decided the appeal, observing that it be treated as dismissed for statistical purposes. 4. As a matter of fact, before the CIT(A), the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtly allowing the appeal had gone into the question of additions made on account of jewellery and not a word was discussed with regard to the unexplained cash addition of Rs. 26,75,000/-. 8. The assessee thereafter moved a misc. application seeking indulgence of the coordinate Bench for also giving findings with regard to unexplained cash. However, the coordinate Bench had dismissed the misc. application vide order dated 29.08.2022, but the coordinate Bench had giving following findings in para 2: "2. In this regard, we hold that since the decision of the Id. CIT(A) has not been disputed in the order dealt only with the jewellery found and its accountability thereof, no specific finding is required. However, in the interest of j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as stated above, cash withdrawals of Rs. 16.70 lakhs were made from ING Bank. It is my considered opinion that this (total) cash amount is sufficient to explain the amount of seized cash and household expenses in the FY, till the date of search". However, while confirming the addition with regard to unexplained jewellery vide para 5, 10 inadvertently, the entire addition of Rs. 2,37,08,076 including on account of unexplained cash of Rs. 26,75,000 was confirmed by dismissing Ground No. 3 of the appeal. In other words, addition of Rs. 26,75,000 has been inadvertently confirmed which is contrary to the findings recorded at para 5.5 as reproduced above. This has resulted in a mistake apparent from the record while deciding Ground No. 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s reproduced above are final and therefore, the entire addition of Rs. 26,75,000 as made on account of unexplained cash is to be considered as deleted as per the above clarification given by ITAT. Hence, based on such clarification provided by ITAT vide its recent order dated 29/08/2022, the above findings of Ld. CIT(A) regarding sufficient availability of cash to explain addition of seized cash of Rs. 26,75,000 are now final. In view of the above, your honour is requested to kindly rectify the mistake of confirming the addition with regard to unexplained jewellery vide para 5.10 at Rs. 2,37,08,076 which should be reduced to Rs. 2,10,33,076 after excluding the seized cash of Rs. 26,75,000 since the same stands duly explain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cussed with regard to the unexplained cash addition of Rs. 26,75,000/-. The doctrine of merger of the first appellate order of learned CIT(A) with the order of the Tribunal would not come into action in the present facts and circumstances as the issue of unexplained cash addition was not at all entered into by the coordinate Bench while deciding the appeal vide order dated 24.09.2019. Then, as observed above, while reproducing the order of coordinate Bench in the misc. application, it comes up that the specific observation was made at the time of disposal of misc. application that the Bench has not disputed the findings of learned CIT(A) on this issue. This observation is categorical finding with regard to the fact that findings of learned ....