TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1376
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Total income R/o 5,92,620 AY 2010-11. S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs. ) 1. Total income as per order dated 09.03.2017 6,55,470 2. Add:- undisclosed income as per para 4 3,00,000 Total income 9,55,470 AT 2011-12. S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs. ) 1. Total income as per order dated 09.03.2017 5,61,970 2. Add:- undisclosed income as per para 4 4,00,000 3 Total income 9,61,970 AY 2013-14. S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs. ) 1. Total income as per order dated 09.03.2017 11,16,150 2. Add:- undisclosed income as per para 4 5,00,000 Total income 16,16,150 AY 2014-15. S. No. Particulars Amount (in Rs. ) 1. Total income as per order dated 09.03.2017 12,30,570 2. Add:- undisclosed income as per para 4 6,00,000 Total income 16,30,570 4. In brief, case of the department as described in the order u/s 154 of the Act is that on 17.12.2017, a search and seizure action u/s 132(1) of the Act was carried out in the case of Adventage Group, Jaipur to which the assessee belongs. Notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee on 20.06.2016. There upon, the assessee filed return of income for the above said....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d In this case, the assessment u/s 143(3)/153B(1)(b) was completed on 10.03.2017 at total income of Rs. 6,55,470/-. Thereafter the Hon'ble CIT(A)-4, Jaipur passed the order resulting in increase of income by Rs. 3,00,000/-. Therefore, amount to Rs. 3,00,000/- should not added to your total income for A.Y. 2010-11." Assessment Year 2011-12 "Particulars of mistake proposed to be rectified In this case, the assessment u/s 143(3)/153B(1)(b) was completed on 09.03.2017 at total income of Rs. 5,61,970/-. Thereafter the Hon'ble CIT(A)-4, Jaipur passed the order resulting in increase of income by Rs. 4,00,000/-. Therefore, amount to Rs. 4,00,000/- should not added to your total income for A.Y. 2011-12." Assessment Year 2013-14 "Particulars of mistake proposed to be rectified In this case, the assessment u/s 143(3)/153B(1)(b) was completed on 09.03.2017 at total income of Rs. 11,16,150/-. Thereafter the Hon'ble CIT(A)-4, Jaipur passed the order resulting in increase of income by Rs. 5,00,000/-. Therefore, amount to Rs. 5,00,000/- should not added to your total income for A.Y. 2013-14." Assessment Year 2014-15 "Particulars of mistake proposed to be rectified In this case,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....considered but not found acceptable for the reasons that the assessee gave a generic reply without specifically pointing out that why income of Rs. 4,00,000/- offered before the Hon'ble ITSC shouldn't be added to her total income on account of undisclosed income which was offered by the assessee herself in the application filed before Hon'ble ITSC. It is pertinent of the mention that the additional income offered by the assessee was worked out on the basis of loose papers, notings and documents in respect of sale and purchase of properties, payable and receivable etc. seized by the department during the search proceedings on 17.12.14." In this regard, as regards AY 2013-14, the Assessing Officer observed in para 4.1 of the orders u/s 154 as under:- "4.1. The written submission of the assessee has been duly considered but not found acceptable for the reasons that the assessee gave a generic reply without specifically pointing out that why income of Rs. 5,00,000/- offered before the Hon'ble ITSC shouldn't be added to her total income on account of undisclosed income which was offered by the assessee herself in the application filed before Hon'ble ITSC. It i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the assessee in the said application submitted before Settlement Commission, without any incriminating material. Ld. AR has further contended that even Learned CIT(A) sustained the additions, while upholding the orders u/s 154 rejecting the same contention raised there in the 5 appeals there. 13. In support of his contention, Ld. AR has relied on a covered matter i.e. decision by Coordinate Bench, Jaipur on 19.08.2019 in ITA No. 837/JP/2018 and 708 & 709/JP/2018, in relation to the case of the same assessee-appellant. 14. On the other hand, Ld. DR for the department had relied on the findings recorded by Learned CIT(A), and the observations made by the ACIT in the 5 years u/s 154 of the Act. 15. Above cited decision in ITA No. 837/JP/2018 and 708/JP/2018 pertains to the assessment year 2012-13, and third appeal in ITA No. 709/JP/2018 pertaining to the assessment year 2015-16. 16. As noticed above, while passing the orders u/s 154 of the Act, ACIT based the same on the admission made by the assessee in her application submitted before Settlement Commission. As rightly pointed out by Ld. AR for the appellant, the ACIT did not refer to any incriminating material for the purpo....