AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1589
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellery, precious and semi precious stones. It was submitted that there were search on the premises of the assessee on 09.12.2015. It was submitted that in the course of search, it was found that the assessee was also doing the business of manufacturing of gold jewellery. A notice under section 153A of the Act came to be issued on 10.01.2017. Returns of income were filed for all the assessment years on 04.10.2017. The ld. CIT-DR drew our attention to page 4 of the paper book of the assessee to submit that this was a copy of inventory of the items found during the course of search and item No. 21 showed a bunch of loose sheets, identified as BDJC-21, item No. 25 showed a register identified as BDJC-25, item No. 27 showed a hard disc and its extracts as BDJC-27. He further drew our attention to page 27 of the paper book to show that item No. 12 was identified as pen drive being CWJ-12. Ld. CITDR drew our attention to page 62 of the paper book which was a copy of the audit report and at page 64 at Column No. 8, it is mentioned as "Trading in jewellery, precious & semi precious stones". It was submitted that this was wrong and the assessee was also doing manufacture of gold jewellery. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that consequently in the return of income for the relevant assessment year, the assessee had revalued the closing stock and had enhanced the same, however, after enhancement of the closing stock it was noticed that this resulted into a loss for the assessment year 2012-2013 to an extent of Rs. 2,52,00,090.65. It was the submission that this has been brought out by the ld. AO in page 2 para 3 of his assessment order. It was his further submission that in the other assessment years, the difference had been shown as income. It was the submission that consequently the net result was that the disclosure made by the assessee by enhancement of value of closing stock was to an extent of Rs. 4,53,08,556.80 as against Rs. 10 crores offered by the assessee. It was submitted that before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has claimed that the AO had got the figures in the course of search only for the assessment year 2012-2013 but for the remaining assessment years the AO has resorted to estimation. It was the submission that BDJC-27 being the hard disk, contained data for all the years upto the date of search. It was further submitted by the ld. CIT-DR that the pen drive CWJ-12 contained the sales....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the AO has considered the annual figure for each year, no extrapolation has been done and neither estimation has been done. Ld. CIT-DR drew our attention to page 13 & 14 of the assessment order to submit that even in respect of silver for some of the years the computation showed a negative stock. He further drew our attention to page 17 of the assessment order to submit that in respect of gold purchased the AO had determined the net annual gold stock at 60,684 gms in respect of Cuttack and 11,012 gms in respect of Bhubaneswar and after reducing the sales of 35174.11 arrived at the stock of 25510 as on 31.03.2012 to which he added the stock of the assessment year 2011-2012 of 78,177 being the opening stock in the assessment year 2012-2013 to arrive at a total stock of 1,04,088 gms. The AO reduced the disclosed closing stock of 34,453.633 to determine the undisclosed stock at 69,634, the rate as per the purchase register maintained by the assessee was applied and determined the value of undisclosed stock at Rs. 19,07,42,154/-. It was further submitted that in page 18 of the assessment order the AO determined the undisclosed investment in the stock at 21,28,56,716/- and as such the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... which is a copy of the remand report sent by the AO to the ld. CIT(A) on 31.03.2019, wherein the new incumbent AO mentioned that the said BDJC-27 and CWJ-12 was not opening in a general computer and even a computer expert was unable to open the same. He had also sent the seized materials to the ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT-DR drew our attention to page 13 of the ld. CIT(A) to submit that he has given a finding in para 9.1 to 9.3. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) mentioned that the AO has not made any independent enquiry before making the additions and that the entire assessment order is a reproduction of the appraisal report. It was further submitted that in para 9.2 the ld. CIT(A) mentioned that there is no data available in respect of any of the financial year other than F.Ys. 2009-2010 & 2010-2011, even for these years the data available are partial. It was further submitted that in para 9.3 the ld. CIT(A) holds that neither during the course of search nor the post search proceedings, nor in the assessment proceedings, nor even in the remand proceedings, the seized materials have been confronted to the assessee and that the additions have been made in complete disregard to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the A.O. issued the show cause notice dated 08.12.2017 to the assessee, it had filed the reply on 26.12.2017 (pages 48 and 49 of the paper book filed by the assessee on 17.02.2020). It can be seen from said reply that no such contention as regard nonsupply of seized material was ever raised by the AR of the assessee. iii.) As per scrutiny report dated 06.11.2019 (copy enclosed) submitted by Shri R. N. Satdive, ACIT, Central Circle, Cuttack, the digital books found at Cuttack and Bhubaneswar were identified as BDJC-27, CWJ-12 and other documents BDJC-21 respectively which were seized. It is also mentioned that the documents BDJC-27 were copied from original documents on 15.12.2017 in front of the A/R of the assessee Shri Ketul Seth along with two independent witnesses. iv.) I have also asked the Addl.DIT (Investigation), Unit-2, Bhubaneswar (Smt. Dipi Agarwal) to supply the copies of extracts of BDJC-12 and CWJ-12. The ACIT, Central Circle, Cuttack has also been asked to locate the copies of these extracts. Since the matter is seven years old therefore it will take some time to place these documents before the Hon'ble Bench. v.) It may please be noted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng heed to such request passed the appellate order in haste. It was an admitted fact that the assessee firm did not maintain any stock registers and all the data was available in hard disc, pendrive, BDJC-21, BDJC-25 and other seized documents. Therefore the allegation of non-supply of seized material is just an eye-wash and should not be believed. b) The ld. CIT(Appeals) has not accorded due cognizance to the fact that the partner of the assessee firm had voluntarily made a disclosure of Rs. 10 crores on account of variation in the stock u/s. 132(4) while replying to question No. 16 (page-32 & 33 of paper book filed by the assessee on 17.02.2020). In the last page-8 of the statement (page-35 of paper book filed by the assessee on 17.02.2020), he has affirmed that said statement was recorded correctly. Further he has affirmed that it was recoded without any pressure, coercion or inducement. c) The statement u/s. 132(4) was recorded on 10.12.2015. No retraction was made by the said partner or other partners of the assessee firm till the date of filing return of income on 04.10.2017. Thus retraction was made in the present case after a lapse of 22 months. d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion is an extremely important piece of evidence though it is not conclusive. Therefore, a statement made voluntarily by the assessee could form the basis of assessment. The mere fact that the assessee retracted the statement could not make the statement unacceptable. The burden lay on the assessee to establish that the admission made in the statement at the time of survey was wrong and in fact there was no additional income. This burden does not even seem to have been attempted to be discharged". g) The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs. O. Abdul Razak (20 taxmann.com 48) held that a self-serving retraction, without anything more cannot dispel statement made under oath under section 132(4) of the Act. A statement made under oath deemed and permitted to be used in evidence, by express statutory provision, has to be taken as true unless there is contra evidence to dispel such assumption. The observations of the Hon'ble High Court in paras-6 to 9 are reproduced as under: "6. The additions made by the assessing officer was on the basis of clear admission made by the assessee in the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act. The Tribunal has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial on record with respect to the alleged actual payments. The deletion made by the Tribunal is on the premise that the burden of proving undisclosed income in search is not established by the department. 8. It cannot be doubted for a moment that the burden of proving the undisclosed income is squarely on the shoulders of the department. Acquisition of properties by the assessee are proved with the documents seized in search. Since understatement of consideration in documents is the usual practice, the officer questioned the assessee on payments made over and above the amounts stated in the documents. Assessee gave sworn statement honestly disclosing the actual amounts paid. The question now to be considered is whether the sworn statement constitutes evidence of undisclosed income and if so whether it is evidence collected by the department. In our view the burden of proof is discharged by the department when they persuaded the assessee to state details of undisclosed income, which the assessee disclosed in his sworn statement on being confronted with the title deeds seized in search. 9. Section 132 of the Income Tax Act deals with search and seizure and sub-secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nwards but retraction, is almost after an year and that too when the assessment proceedings were being taken up in November 1996. We may observe that retraction should be made as soon as possible and immediately after such a statement has been recorded, either by filing a complaint to the higher officials or otherwise brought to the notice of the higher officials, either by way of a duly sworn affidavit or statements supported by convincing evidence through which an assessee could demonstrate that the statements initially recorded were under pressure/coercion and factually incorrect. In our view, retraction after a sufficient long gap or point of time, as in the instant case, loses its significance and is an afterthought. Once statements have been recorded on oath, duly signed, it has a great evidentiary value and it is normally presumed that whatever stated at the time of recording of statements under section 132(4), are true and correct and brings out the correct picture, as by that time the assessee is uninfluenced by external agencies. Thus, whenever an assessee pleads that the statements have been obtained forcefully/by coercion/undue influence without material/contrary to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....15 of the Evidence Act is also not possible at all. The retraction filed by the assessee in the case before us is hit by section 115 and hence the Assessing Officer was justified in rejecting the same. We see no infirmity in his action". j) In the case of Kantilal C Shah vs. ACIT (14 taxmann.com 108), it was held by the Hon'ble Ahmedabad ITAT that statement recorded u/s. 132(4A) is an evidence by itself and any retraction should be supported by strong evidence to show that there was coercion or undue force. This view is also supported by following decisions: (i) Carpenters Classics (Exim) Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (108 ITD 142) (Bangalore ITAT) (ii) Hiralal Maganlal & Co. vs. DCIT (96 ITD 113) (Mumbai ITAT) In the case of Hotel Kiran (82 ITD 453) (Pune ITAT), the Tribunal held that where during the course of search, the assessee makes some admission, he debars the authorized officers from making further investigation. Therefore, in their wisdom, the Legislature has provided that such statement can be used as evidence and the assessment can be made on that basis. A reference may be made to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld also be relied upon to draw inference that there were similar transactions throughout period of six years covered by section 153A of the Act. The observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High court in para-11 & 13 are reproduced as under: "11. The question, however, is whether the seized material can be relied upon to also draw the inference that there can be similar transactions throughout the period of six years covered by Section 153A. It is in this context it is relevant to note the judgment of the Supreme Court in H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali (90 ITR 271). We have to remember that with the advent of Section 153A, we are taken back to the pre-chapter XIV-B situation, where assessments were made on the basis of material and evidence collected during search. In the cited judgment the facts were these. The case arose under the sales tax law. Assessments under the MP General Sale Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act had been completed on a dealer of iron and steel. They were made primarily on the basis of the returned filed by the assessee and the books of accounts. Subsequently, the flying squad of the sales tax department inspected the business premises of the assessee and fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essing authority. If he fails to do his duty, he cannot be allowed to call upon the assessing authority to prove conclusively what turnover he had suppressed. That fact must be within his personal knowledge. Hence, the burden of proving that fact is on him. No circumstance has been placed before the assessing authority to show that the assessee's dealings during September 1, 1960, to September 19, 1960, outside his accounts were due to some exceptional circumstance or that they were proportionately more than his dealings outside his accounts during the remaining periods. The assessing authority could not have been in possession of any correct measure to find out the escaped turnover during the periods November 1, 1959, to August 31, 1960, and September 20, 1960, to October 20, 1960. The task of the assessing authority in finding out the escaped turnover was by no means easy. In estimating any escaped turnover, it is inevitable that there is some guess-work. The assessing authority while making the "best judgment" assessment, no doubt, should arrive at its conclusion without any bias and on rational basis. That authority should not be vindictive or capricious. If the estimate ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....chasers from the assessee to come forward and declare that they have paid more than what was appearing in the sale bills issued to them and has commented upon the lack of any inquiry from the purchasers on this line. Suffice to say that this throws an impossible burden on the Assessing Officer, having regard to the observations of the Supreme Court that the assessee cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own illegal acts, that it was his duty to place all facts truthfully before the assessing authority, that if he fails to do his duty he cannot be allowed to say that Assessing Authority failed to establish suppression of income, that the facts are within his personal knowledge and therefore it was the burden of the assessee to prove that there was no suppression. Thirdly, the Tribunal has stated that there was no corroborative material to substantiate the contents of the loose papers found during the search. We are not impressed by this reason at all. The papers are not denied or disputed by the assessee. The CIT (Appeals) has found that the partners of the assessee firm had admitted to the practice of suppressing the profits. The papers themselves show two different rates, o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one of the provisions under Chapter XIV-B mandates that for making block assessment, there shall be evidence regarding the concealment of income for every year in the block period. It cannot be expected that the assessee would retain documents regarding the concealment of income. If documents for every concealment are insisted to be searched, practically the provision for block assessment would be defeated. We cannot shut our eyes to the legislative intent. Here, what was disclosed that for sale, no bills are issued, but paper slips are issued with the price. Though carbon copy is retained, it did not contain the sale price. Sale slips are destroyed then and there. Cash books are maintained by recording the 80 per cent of the price of liquor at a later date. When such practices are adopted, nobody can expect evidence for every year in a block period. What is possible is only to have a best judgment assessment on the basis of the evidence collected during search. The Assessing Officer is authorized and empowered to make block assessment in a judicious manner on the basis of the materials disclosed during the search under section 132 of the Income-tax Act. 10. No person othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment in any year during the block period at a lesser rate than that was assessed for the assessment year during which search was conducted. The appellate Tribunal was not justified in arriving a conclusion that there is no evidence regarding concealment of the income for the assessment years 1996-97 to 2000-01. The procedure adopted by the first appellate authority in calculating the concealment of income at different rates is also without any supporting materials and against the intention of the Legislature expressed in Chapter XIV-B of the Income-tax Act. Hence, we answer the question in favour of the appellant and find that the respondent is liable to be assessed during the block period at uniform rate". l) The CIT(Appeals) has held in para-9.1 on page-13 of the appellate order that the A.O. has not made any enquiry before making the impugned additions on the basis of seized documents. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd. (56 taxmann.com 286) wherein it was held that In case of unaccounted entries found in books of account of assessee, though it was the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial submitted at the stage of appeals, if deemed proper by way of making or causing to be made a "further inquiry" in exercise of the power under Section 250(4). This approach not having been adopted, the impugned order of ITAT, and consequently that of CIT (Appeals), cannot be approved or upheld". In view of above facts & circumstances, the order of CIT(Appeals) needs to be reversed and that of the A.O. is required to be restored. 5. It was further submitted that under the provisions of Section 292C of the Act, the burden was on the assessee to prove that the data in the seized material was wrong. This has not been done by the assessee. It was further submitted that the copies of the seized material was never asked for by the assessee either before the DDIT(Inv.) or before the AO. It was submitted that even when the show cause notice was issued to the assessee, the assessee did not raise the said contention. 6. Further, Ld CITDR submitted that assessee's grievance that copies of the seized materials were not confronted to the assessee is baseless as the digital books found at Cuttack and Bhubaneswar were identified as BDJC-27, CWJ-12 and other documents BDJC-21 resp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Delhi High Court also placed the burden of the Tribunal to ensure that an effective enquiry was carried out. It was the submission that the seized documents being the extracts from BDJC 27 & CWJ-12 showed unaccounted purchases and sales and these evidences carried over the oral submissions given by the partner of the assessee firm in respect of the declaration of Rs. 10 crores. It was the submission that the seized materials showed more than Rs. 30 crores of transactions. The ld. CIT-DR further drew our attention to the written submission filed by the ld.AR of the assessee and the contents of the same are as under :- 1. Assessee is a partnership Firm carrying on trading business in Gold and Silver Jewellery. Search and seizure conducted u/s132 of the .T Act, in the business premises of the assessee on 09.12.2019. 2. For the impugned asst. years followings additions were made under un-disclosed investment in purchase of Gold, Silver and undisclosed sales and a separate addition was made towards seizure of cash of Rs. 23,28.690/- found on the date of search. AY-2012-13 AY-2015-16 AY-2016-17 Qty (gms) Amount Qty (gms) Amount....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecoded u/s 132(4). 10. It may kindly be noted that disclosure made by the assessee is out of confusion and to avoid future litigation and in the Question No. -16 of the statement u/s-132(4) there is a pressure on the assessee by the search party inviting reference to provision of penalty & prosecution. 11. In the return filed u/s-153A assessee disclosed additional income of Rs. 4.53 crore due to change in valuation of closing stock. There has been no addition by the A.O towards nondisclosure of balance income of Rs. 5.47 crore (Rs.10 crore - Rs. 4.53 crores) in the assessment completed u/s-153A. 12. It is submitted that addition cannot be made solely on the basis of statement recorded u/s-132(4) without its corroboration with cogent materials brought on record. 13. In the assessment order A.O has not referred to any incriminating entry in the books of accounts found in the course of search. The A.O has acted without material or evidence in making such addition. Only a general observation is made in the assessment order and remand report that the additions are based on seized material. The contents of the seized materials are not brought out in de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the appraisal report is reproduced therein from page 2 para 4 to page 22 para 5. It was the submission that no independent enquiry was done by the AO in respect of alleged evidence found in the course of search. It was the submission that the additions are based on certain calculation made at page 17 of the assessment order which is totally unsupported by any reference to the seized material. Ld.AR further drew our attention to page 50 of the paper book which is a copy of notice issued u/s. 153A of the Act. At pages 53 to 56 is the questionnaire issued to the assessee which is extracted hereinbelow :- Questionnaires (Bishandayal Jewellers) 1. If the return has been e-filed, a hard copy of the return with signature of the assessee in the verification column of the return form. 2. If the accounts have been audited u/s. 44AB, the audit report in original along with the audited accounts with all schedules to the Balance Sheet and the P&L account. In case accounts are maintained but not liable to-tax audit, original copies of Balance Sheet and P&L account along with all schedules thereto should be furnished. 3. Give a detailed note on the business ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ils of the sundry debtors in whose names sums exceeding Rs. 1,00,000/- each was outstanding, including the accounts squared up during the year in the following format: Name& address of the debtor Opening balance Details of transactions Closing balance Nature of service rendered/transaction Debit Credit Debit Credit Debit Credit (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Whether the person is covered u/s. 40A(2)(b) 10. Give details of the loans, advances and deposits given including the accounts squared up during the year in the following format: Name& address of the debtor Purpose of debit/deposit Opening balance Details of transactions Closing balance Rate of interest Total interest in the year Purpose which given Debit Credit Debit Credit Debit Credit (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) State whether any money has been advanced free of interest. If so, give details and state the necessity of advancing the money. Also show cause why equivalent interest at the prevailing market rate should not be disallowed out of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... F/Y 2011-12 in the following format Name & Pan of the Person Description of the Property & Address/location Amount invested in Rs/Your investment Date/Dates of Transaction Mode of Transaction (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 20. Furnish month-wise details of opening stock, purchase, sales and closing stock of different materials - indicate quantity and value. 21. Whether any preliminary expenses have been claimed during the year ? If so, please give the details. Please explain the admissibility of such claim. 22. Please furnish details of all the expenditure claimed as deduction u/s. 37 of the Income Tax Act. 1961 with documentary proof in support of your claim that such expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of your business. (i) Please specifically mention any penalty or fine imposed on/incurred by you during the year by any Authority alongwith details regarding the offence or violation for which the same were imposed. (ii) Please state why such amounts should not be disallowed as per the Explanation to Section 37(1). 23. Please furnish the names and complete postal addresses of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....digital books, tax audit report and audited accounts. In addition to the above you had furnished certain statements and stock details during the post search investigation. From such details as well as from other enquiries made and statements recorded on oath, it is seen that although you have dealt in sale of gold and I silver ornaments and articles and other articles but the stock statement maintained by you consist of gold bars bf 99.5% purity and ornaments. There is no mention of manufacture of gold ornaments from gold bars as to how much of ornaments were manufactured out of gold bars. The statements also reveal that while converting gold bar info gold ornaments, you have taken different rates on different data varying from as low as of 101.01 (for July, 2014 to high of 103.361. Neither any evidence in support of actual manufacture of ornaments from bars were found in your premises during the course of search nor you could produce any such evidence afterwards; In fact in the statements recorded on oath you admitted that no such evidence was ever maintained by you. The ornaments dealt in by you were of 22ct gold i.e. having 91.6% purity. The normal rate of conversion from 99.5% ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....567131.8 3246.25 Applying that rate undisclosed income out of sale of undisclosed stock as mentioned above is calculated as under. FY Undisclosed stock in gm Avr Rate per gm Income on sale of undisclosed stock (Rs.) 2011-12 69634 2873.56 20,00,97,477 2014-15 1588 3306.57 52,50,833 2015-16 6757 3246.25 2,19,34,911 TOTAL 22,72,83,221 The above sales to the extent of Rs. 22,72,83,221/- has not been disclosed by the assessee in respective AYs. Please explain why the same should not be added to the respective asstt. Year. Regarding silver stock at Cuttack and Bhubaneswar similar to gold stock at those two shops is also computed as under : BBSR 19022.65 108997 -89974.35 NET 116801.012 566912.98 (E) 14-15// CTC 757439 5024.64 83266.363 383473.88 467256.123 MM 168 94.19 120454.06 -103559.87 NET &....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 69.868 182.302 48.99 21/10/15 393.39 378.67 558.973 182.302 17/10/15 129.96 123.066 664.429 541.363 15/10/15 37.28 35.695 325.587 289.892 Ornaments weighing 2612.89 gm was returned to Bishandayal Jewellers. It was non-fine or of 91.6% purity. Since the Karigar had been provided gold of 99.5% purity, the supply was converted and taken as 2501.842 gm of fine gold(99.5% purity) to compute the balance of gold (99.5% purity) remained with the Karigar. The running return reached 3408.281 gm leaving a balance of 857.051 gm of gold (99.5% purity) with the Karigar. Application of normal conversion rate makes ornaments of 2717.000412 gm(91.6%) from 2501.842gm of gold(99.5%) (108.6/100 x 2501.842). The figures in the table show booking of stock at a lower irate. The difference is nothing but making charges paid to the Karigar in kind. In this particular case, the differential weight applying rate of Rs. 2500/- per gram comes to Rs. 2,60.275/- (104.11 x 2500). The Karigars are regularly collecting raw material from the assessee firm and returning finished products to it. Payments are made to them regularly and the accounts a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proceedings and even there no data was retrieved because there was nothing to retrieve. The ld. AR submitted that on 23.10.2019, in the course of remand proceedings, the AO has asked the assessee to attend the office on 24.01.2019 at 2.00 PM to enable the office to provide the required documents/materials but they were unable to do so, as there was no data to retrieve. It was further submitted by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee that on perusal of Panchnama at page 4 in item No. 27, the authorised officer mentioned that the BDJC-27 as hard disk with working copy. If this is the working copy on the basis of which the appraisal report has been prepared even such working copy has not been provided to the assessee nor has it been shown from where they have got the said working copy. It was submitted that it should be kept in mind that from the said alleged seized material in the appraisal report excel sheet has been prepared. Nothing has been provided to even corroborate that what has been extracted in the excel sheet are from the seized material or not. It was the prayer that as the additions have not made on the basis of any seized material, therefore, the additions made by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt. 17. Today, i.e. on 26.09.2022, Shri S.Shivanandan, ld. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR (who has argued the case) and placed the appraisal report as has been sought by the Bench on 23.09.2022. After careful perusal of the appraisal report, the bench proceeded to complete the order. 18. It must be mentioned here that a perusal of the assessment order at page 2 para 4 shows that the AO himself has categorically admitted that he has extracted the investigation done and the conclusion reached by the investigation wing and that has been reproduced. Thus, clearly para 4 of the assessment order is nothing but the extract from the appraisal report. In para 5 of the assessment order, the AO has made a gist of the para 4, which is the extract of the appraisal report, in the form of show cause notice on the assessee. This makes it clear that the AO when completed the assessment, was not privy to the extracts of the seized materials, namely, BDJC-27 and CWJ-12. A perusal of the paper book filed by the assessee at page 27, which shows the pen drive as CWJ-12 and at page 4 which shows the hard disk with working copy as BDJC-27, admittedly has not been seen by the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the appraisal report ? These facts clearly show that the foundation on the basis of which the assessment has been done, being the so called extracts from BDJC-27 and CWJ-12, are not available with the department, nor they were provided to the assessee for his rebuttal. 19. Now, coming to the appraisal report, the extracts of which has been used by the assessee in para 7, though the ld.CIT-DR refers to the same as the excel sheet prepared by the AO, this statement of the AO in his assessment order at para 4 of the comparison with the same with appraisal report, shows that these are nothing but the figures dawn out by the investigation wing in the appraisal report. At page 7, the gold bars have been quantified at 98,284.36 gms and the old gold ornaments purchased net weight has been determined at 492.929 gms. The appraisal report, thus, determines the computation of purchases of Cuttack branch for the assessment year 2011-2012 at 126.555 gms whereas the sales have been determined at 50101.66 to be the transfer to the Bhubaneswar branch head office is 8572 gms. Even these are the information relating to the assessment year 2011-2012. The impugned first year of appeal is assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....seized during the course of search u/s 132 of the IT Act, 1961 on 09.12.2015 as per item no "BDJC-27" of Annexure-A to Panchanama dated 11.12.2015 in case of Bishandayal Jewellers at the business premises at Naya Sarak, Cuttack. The seized material i.e. "BDJC-27" of Annexure-A dated 11.12.2015 was found in sealed position and the seals were intact. The seal was opened in our presence and we have witnessed the entire copying process. The entire process got over at 5.30 P.M. on 15.12.2017. No untoward incident happened during the process. The Hard Disk was again sealed in our presence. We affix our signature for having witnessed the above proceedings. Ketul shett 15.12.17 Assessee's authorised representative Witness-1- Jaish Mishra 15. 12. 17. Witness-2- Ramesh Chandra Nayak 15/10/12 Authorized Signatures (VIJAY D. PATEL) Asst. Commissioner of Income Central Circle, Cuttack Document 2 PURCHASES Fin GOLD at 108.6% YEAR// BAR Shop GOLD ORNAM ENT OLD GOLD SALE NET GOLD ANNUAL E STOCK CUMULATIV CUMULATIV E STOCK UNDISC RATE: LOSED total GOLD FROM disclosed by....