2024 (7) TMI 895
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the documents seized that the assessee Shri Kaluram Ramlal Gehlot had booked two flats A-1702 & A-1802 in the project Rajgruhi Residency. It was further seen that the assessee has made payment partly through cheque and partly in cash for the purchase of the said flats. As per the seized documents, the assessee had made total cash payment of Rs. 67,25,000/- for the purchase of flat A-1702 and cash payment of Rs. 67,25,000/- for the purchase of flat No.1802. The above fact of taking on-money in cash from the assessee was duly admitted by Shri Yuvraj Dhamale, the main person of Dhamale group and MD of the company in his statement. Accordingly, the DCIT, Central Circle 2(3), Pune who was having the possession of the seized material in capacity of the Assessing Officer of Shri Yuvraj S Dhamale and M/s.Wellbuild Merchants Pvt. Ltd., recorded the satisfaction as per provisions of section 153A of the Act that the information contained on page 12 of Bundle 55 seized from the residential premises of Shri Pravin Gawali relates to Shri Kaluram Ramlal Gehlot. Accordingly, notice u/s 153C of the Act was issued to the assessee, in response to which, the assessee filed his return of income u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to make as per law and has taken a possible view. It was submitted that during the course of scrutiny proceedings u/s. 153C r.w.s.143(3) of the Act, whatever documents, evidences and explanations were called for, were duly submitted by the assessee. Further, the assessment was not made in haste and was made after making necessary enquiries for assessing the income and thereby making addition to the tune of Rs. 1,02,45,000/-. The Assessing Officer had made detailed enquiries seeking clarification on each aspect in the case of the assessee. It was further submitted that the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs. 1 crore u/s. 69B of the Act as unexplained investment on protective basis against purchase of shop Nos. 11 and 12 at Rajgruhi Business HUB, Pune. The said protective addition was made only on presumptions and surmises and only on the basis of details of documents, evidence found and seized from various premises covered under the search action. 5.2 Without prejudice to the above, it was further submitted that no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee on protective basis also since the seized papers do not mention the name of the assessee and the assessee has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... iii. CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd. 203 ITR 108 iv. Grasim Industries Ltd. Vs CIT, Central-I 321 ITR 92 v. Meerut Roller Flour Mills (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT 420 ITR 216 vi. Ashoke Kumar Parasramka Vs. ACIT [1998] 65 ITD 1 vii. CIT Vs. Hastings Properties 253 ITR 124 viii. CIT vs. Smt. Nirmal Anand 245 ITR 836 9. In his another plank of argument, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the assessment order was passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s.153C of the Act, therefore, it cannot be revised without revising the approval given by the Addl.CIT. In this regard, he placed reliance on the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Dr. Ashok Kumar ITA 192 of 2000 ii. Surendra L Hiranandani Vs Pr.CIT Cenl ITA No.3226/M/2017 iii. Trinity Infra Ventures LTD. Vs DCIT ITA No.584/H/2015 iv. Dhariwal Industries Vs CIT Central ITA Nos.1108 to 1113/PUN/2014 10. He accordingly submitted that the order of the PCIT invoking jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act being not in accordance with law should be set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee be allowed. 11. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the PCIT. 12. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....23 11 499.12 Kaluram Ghelot 5,00,000 50,00,000 24 12 499.12 Kaluram Ghelot 5,00,000 25,00,000 25 13 379.22 Kaluram Ghelot 5,00,000 25,00,000 06. The above details clearly shows that the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- has been paid by way of cheque and Rs. 50,00,000/-, Rs. 25,00,000/- and Rs. 25,00,000/- are separately paid against each shop. This information is also contained from the details filed before the Settlement Commission. The complete list of Shop sold has also been filed before the Settlement Commission and the above information is part and parcel of the total details." 13. We find the Assessing Officer thereafter at para 14 of the order in the case of Smt. Soram Kaluram Gehlot i.e. the wife of assessee has made addition of Rs. 1 crore by observing as under: "14. In view of above facts, evidences seized above clearly establishes beyond doubt that the payment of on-money by the assessee which also gets corroborated by the statement of the key person of Dhamale Group Shri Yuvraj Sitaram Dhamale. These corroborative evidences clearly led us to confirm that the alleged documents have materialized into transactions and htat the assessee had paid on money agai....