TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 40
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss appeals vide ITA No.3001/PUN/2025 (by the assessee) & 3289/PUN/2025 (by the Revenue) for assessment year 2014-15 as the lead cases. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of sale and purchase of land, plots and development of land. It specializes in purchase of litigated agricultural or raw plot of land and develops roads after resolving the litigated issues, creates layouts of saleable plots and sells the plots to the end users for residential projects, townships etc. It is also involved in construction of residential flats as well as commercial shops. The group, as a part of its modus operandi, to buy land has formed many companies to transact through these entities. It filed its original return of income on 22.12.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 9,22,52,410/- along with audit report dated 15.10.2014 in Form 3CA- 3CD. 4. A search & seizure action u/s. 132 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act) was conducted in Viraj Group cases on 20.04.2023. As a part of this search action, office premises of M/s Viraj Estates Pvt. Ltd. situated at 4th Floor Abhyankar Tower, MG Road, Nashik-422001 [Party No.YO-01 of Viraj ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourse of search from the office and residential premises belonging to the Viraj group and key employees of the group. The assessee requested the Assessing Officer to provide the details of quantification of transactions identified during the post search enquiry which were provided to the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings the assessee raised objections stating that the office premises at 3rd Floor, Abhayankar Towers, MG Road, Nashik searched by Party No. YO-1(1) by Search Team is in the name of S.C Pawar, Advocate. Further, office premises at Anandvalli, Behind Petrol Pump, Near Makaloo Hotel, Gangapur Road, Nashik searched by Party No.YO-2 by Search Team is also third party premises. Both these premises are neither owned by the assessee nor by any of the entities of the 'Viraj Group'. Accordingly, findings of incriminating documents found and seized from office premises of 'Viraj Group' is incorrect. 7. Vide response dated 10.03.2025, the assessee reiterated the issue citing reliance on the statement of Shri Rohit Manilal Shah recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act, wherein he has stated that the premises YO-2 is not on rent or owned by Viraj Group a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the entities of Viraj group. 9. So far as the issue of rent payment and its verification is concerned, the Assessing Officer noted that what is self-evident by admission of party, need not be verified. According to him, in view of the testimony of Shri Rohit Manilal Shah and Shri Karan Rajendra Shah, the matter has already been put to rest that the books of account of Viraj group and the individuals were kept at the premises which the assessee is now stating as third party premises. Since the Viraj group has already owned up the seized documents and the contents during the proceedings u/s. 131(1A) vide letter dated 28.07.2023 signed by Shri Karan Rajendra Shah in the capacity of Director proposing to tax the income arising from the documents found and seized from the disputed premises proportionately in the hands of M/s. Viraj Estates Pvt Ltd and M/s. Viraj Realty Pvt Ltd, therefore, the Assessing Officer rejected the objections raised by the assessee. 10. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer further noted that Shri Karan R. Shah in his answer to question No.31 recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act on 24.04.2023 while explaining the entries of hand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....maintained by Shri Rohit Manilal Shah, one of the directors in the assessee company at the directions of the members of Viraj family. This fact is admitted by Shri Rohit Manilal Shah in his sworn statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act on 23.04.2023. In addition to the statement of Shri Rohit Manilal Shah, statements of key employees of Viraj Group namely, S/Shri Akarsh R Kejriwal, Vaishal D Naik and Vedang V Naik were also recorded during search u/s. 132 of the Act. The search team found and seized incriminating documents/ digital data supporting receipt of on money in cash, over and above the agreement value and various other transactions of accommodation entries, Cash Loans, other receipts etc. by the Viraj Group, which have remained out of the regular books of accounts. During post search proceedings, the entries made in the handwritten cash books, Tally Data in files V89 and 'CON' data found in Pendrives (found with the employees of Viraj Group) and data in loose chits were exported in Excel format/digitized as Digital Cash Book (DCB) to assist reading the entries having several narrations. The Digital Cash Book (DCB) was prepared during post search proceedings incor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has been accepted by the assessee vide post search submissions dated 21.07.2023. The amount mentioned in those 100 entries comes to Rs. 19,25,26,021/- which pertained to the land / plot on-money receipts which are sold during the year and remained to be offered to tax by the assessee. The Assessing Officer, therefore, made addition of Rs. 19,25,26,021/- as "undisclosed business income". 15. In addition to the above, he noted that on-money of Rs. 7,21,81,100/- has been received where no details as to survey number are provided by the assessee projecting them as third party entireis. However, these entries are found recorded in the handwritten cash book. He, therefore, proposed to add the same by rejecting the arguments advanced by the assessee to consider the same in the peak credit. He noted that 38 entries amounting to Rs. 7,21,81,100/- pertained to the land / plot on-money receipts which are received during the year and remained to be offered to tax by the assessee. He, therefore, made addition of Rs. 7,21,81,100/- being the on-money received by the assessee as "undisclosed business income". 16. The Assessing Officer further noted that there are another set of receipt side ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epartment to provide the details. The assessee also reiterated the fact that the seized documents pertain to third party and these entries should be considered under peak credit for taxation. 19. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee. He observed that these entries are different in nature when compared to the other entries recorded in the handwritten cash book. Since these entries have name and amount written in receipt and payment side without any mention of survey number, RTGS or any other notation to consider them as on money receipts, he held the same to be loan entries or internal movement of cash within the Viraj Group. Since the assessee failed to explain the nature and purpose of inflow and outflow of funds which are marked with narration V A/c, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained money in the hands of the assessee and made addition of the same to the total income of the assessee by invoking the provisions of section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. He accordingly determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 74,12,67,186/- as against the returned income of Rs. 9,22,52,410/-. 20. Before the Ld.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....profit which has been separately taxed as on-money against the unexplained income assessed as peak credit income. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the same on the ground that the addition in respect of on-money has been restricted to the profit element and the gross amount of on-money addition made by the Assessing Officer was not accepted. 22. Similarly, he held that the peak credit income is taxed in respect of separate noting from the seized documents and the same has no corroboration or relevance to the on-money receipts and addition has been made thereof on profit basis. Thus, the addition confirmed in respect of profit earned from on-money receipts and in respect of peak credit have no connection and therefore cannot be allowed to be telescoped with each other. According to him, both are income / source of income and not application out of income / source so as to allow telescopic benefit. He, accordingly, rejected the additional ground raised before him. 23. Aggrieved with part relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee as well the Revenue are in appeal by raising the following grounds: Grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.3001/PUN/2025 1. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the authenticity, possession, and consistency of the core material they relate to (HCB, V89/CON files). 8. The learned CIT(A) erred in applying the statutory presumption of truth under Section 132(4A) or Section 292C to seized materials (Tally files "V89" and "CON") that were not found or seized from the appellant's possession or control, but from third-party premises. 9. The learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining additions related to alleged on- money/accommodation entries without the department definitively establishing the movement of cash, identifying the ultimate recipient of funds, or providing corroborative evidence of actual transactions. 10. The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that all statements were recorded without duress, mental stress, or that signatures constituted valid, independent statements under Section 132(4) when the seized materials were not examined by the deponents during statement recording. 11. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by applying the principle "when part is true the whole is also true" to validate the entirety of the seized documents (HCB, etc.) while ignoring significant factual discrepancies, suc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve 17% of the unaccounted cash receipts without sufficient justification or comparable data specific to the real estate business. 20. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and facts by estimating 17% of the alleged on-money receipts as income, while fundamentally failing to appreciate that the same Hand Written Cash Book (HCB) contained entries for payments made relating to the acquisition/development of the plots/lands during the year under consideration. 21. The learned CIT(A) erred in not accepting the actual profit earned by the assessee from the alleged unaccounted receipts made out of the sale of plots/lands, determined after meeting all expenses including payments for land purchases and other necessary development costs incurred for the sale of plots/lands during the year under consideration. 22. Without prejudice to the primary grounds, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by failing to compute the undisclosed income using the incremental peak credit method. Given that third-party statements (u/s 131) and affidavits consistently denied making cash payments to the appellant, the lower authorities erred in treating the entire gross alleged on-mone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding adjudication before the Hon'ble ITAT, the Appellant prays that all recovery actions be stayed pending litigation to secure the right of appeal. 30. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, delete, or modify any or all of the above grounds of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of the appeal, as may be deemed necessary and appropriate in the interest of justice. PRAYER It is most humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal may be pleased to quash the assessment order and further prayed to delete the addition of Rs. 4,50,00,210/- towards net profit on on-money receipts Rs. 7,41,59,862/- towards addition of peak balance and Rs. 24,24,01,500/- towards incremental peak relating to V-A/c entries made for the AY 2014-15 in the order of Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals). Grounds raised by the Revenue in ITA No.3289/PUN/2025 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in restricting the addition on account of unaccounted on-money receipts to 17% of the such receipts, instead of confirming the entire unaccounted on-money re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-based transactions. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying upon some judicial decisions for estimating profit on unaccounted receipts in an adhoc manner, without appreciating that the facts of those cases were materially distinguishable from the facts of the present case as- (a) In the case of CIT v. President Industries (258 ITR 654-Guj.), the facts are that this case dealt with unaccounted sales where purchases were either recorded or inferable, whereas in the instant case of assessee, the on-money represents cash premium over and above recorded and registered sale consideration, and no cost component relatable to such receipts has been demonstrated. (b) In the case of DCIT v. Panna Corporation (ITA No.323/325 of 2000 Gujarat High Court), the Hon'ble Court has inferred that some expenditure is inherently embedded in turnover, based on the facts of that case, whereas in the instant case of assessee, the assessee has not proved any such embedded expenditure, nor furnished any working or supporting evidence. (c) In the cases of Anand Builders / Nalini V. Shah / Kishor Mohanlal Teliwala....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ofit after allowing 83% as expenses without any evidence would render the provisions of sections 40A(3)/269SS/269ST into nullity and redundant and therefore such assumption of estimation of profit @17% in an arbitrary manner without any evidence would be antithetical to law. 11. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing a premium to tax evaders who do not account their income and expenses in a proper manner for obvious reasons, over an honest assessee who records all transactions in book, as had the assessee accounted its on-money receipts and cash expenses in its book properly, the expenses would have invariably been disallowed u/s. 40A(3). 12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that assuming the net on-money income as arrived at by estimating @ 17% on unaccounted on-money receipts as correct without corroborative and contemporaneous evidence would be playing into the hands of the assessee ignoring the position of law that would entail in view of the above grounds. B. Addition of Rs. 31,01,47,793 u/s. 69A r.w.s. 115BBE ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in seized handwritten cash books/digital data, despite the assessee falling to demonstrate that the receipts and payments represented circulation of the same funds. 18. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in assuming 'the entries are in the nature of frequent receipts and payments indicating rotation of funds' and further assuming the payment entries ("V Exp") relate to cash loans advanced in rotation and further more assuming that "V Exp" relate to the "V A/c" only, when the assessee has not at all furnished any details on the payment entries ("V Exp") also as to what they actually represent, to whom the cash loans were given along with their names and addresses and income earned thereupon. 19. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the accounting and legal position that only when the assessee comes out clean furnishing details of all the receipts ("V A/c") and payment entries ("V Exp") with names and addresses of the parties, the benefit of Peak Credit Theory can be considered to the assessee if there is a case for source of part credits emerging ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3 (SC) he submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to examine a question of law which arises from the facts as found by the authorities below and having a bearing on the tax liability of the assessee. He submitted that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has failed to secure the mandatory prior administrative approval from the Pr.CIT / Pr.DIT as explicitly required by the CBDT circular which is binding on the Revenue. So far as the argument of the Ld. DR that an e-mail approval might exist is concerned, he submitted that it is a matter of pure conjecture, unsupported by the Revenue's own official record. He submitted that the statutory prior approval is a formal, quasi-judicial act and cannot be inferred from hypothetical digital correspondence that contradicts the physical letter. Relying on various other decisions, he submitted that the jurisdiction is not a matter of consent or waiver. A jurisdictional defect is not a mere procedural irregularity but a fundamental void that goes to the very root of the matter. So far as the reliance on the provisions of section 292B and 292BB by the Ld. DR is concerned, he su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal before High Court in absence of any prejudice being caused. Such an issue cannot be directly raised before the Tribunal. 29. The Ld. CIT-DR submitted that the letter dated 14.10.2024 claimed to have been received in the office of the Assessing Officer on 14.11.2024 was never presented before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, it constitutes an additional evidence. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT-DR referring to the letter of the DCIT addressed to the CIT, ITAT, Pune, copy of which is placed in the paper book, submitted that it had been clarified that the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued only after receiving the requisite administrative approval. Therefore, the prior approval of the Pr.CIT was obtained before issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. Therefore, the contention of the assessee regarding the post-facto approval is misplaced as not acceptable. 30. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the assessee in ground of appeal No.1 has challenged the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aper book volume - 4, is a legally nullity as it was obtained through active suppression of material facts. He submitted that the entire proposal for sanction hinges on the statements recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act from Shri Rohit Shah and Shri Karan Shah. However, the record establishes a fatal timeline where the deponents filed formal retractions and affidavits on 22.03.2024 clarifying the true nature of the Tally entries. He submitted that the Assessing Officer sought approval on 30.03.2024 without disclosing these retractions to the Sanctioning Authority. Relying on various decisions, he submitted that an approval founded on a disavowed confession, where the disavowal is hidden from the superior authority, constitutes a colorable exercise of power and is void ab initio. For the above proposition he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha reported in (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC). He submitted that the Assessing Officer's proposal for sanction was founded exclusively on the search time statements of Shri Rohit Shah and Karan Shah. However, the Assessing Officer willfully suppressed the fact that both deponents have formal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (2025) 179 taxmann.com 185 (Del) he submitted that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the said decision has held that where the competent authority used the language 'Yes, I am convinced it is a fit case for reopening of assessment u/s. 147 by issuing notice u/s. 148', same would satisfy mandate of section 151. He accordingly submitted that the approval u/s. 151 was given after due application of mind by the specified authority. 37. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Agroha Fincap Ltd. (supra) has held that where the competent authority used 'Yes, I am convinced it is a fit case for reopening of assessment u/s. 147 by issuing notice u/s. 148', same would satisfy mandate of section 151. The relevant observations of the Hon'ble High Court read as under: "20. So it must be held, that the language "Yes, I am convinced it is a fit case for re-opening the assessment u/s. 147 by issuing notice u/s. 148 satisfies the mandate o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f has failed to quantify in the reasons recorded. He submitted that on-money receipts are not assets. Further in some cases the assessee is the buyer and therefore, the assessee could not have received any on-money. 41. Referring to the provisions of section 2(12A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 he submitted that books of account are those which are maintained in the regular course of business. Therefore, the seized rough jottings from a third party premises do not automatically constitute a qualifying 'asset' for the purpose of invoking the extended limitation period u/s. 149(1)(b). Further, the Revenue has selectively relied on the receipt side of the seized Tally / Registers (V89/CON) while willfully ignoring the payment side documented within the same files. 42. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal vs. S.P. Chaliha reported in (1971) 79 ITR 603 (SC), he submitted that if the material facts like retractions are suppressed, the sanction is a colorable exercise of power. He accordingly submitted that the sanction u/s. 151 of the Act is vitiated by suppression and misrepresentation. 43. The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....liable to be dismissed. We accordingly dismiss the ground No.4 raised by the assessee. 46. In ground of appeal No.6, the assessee has challenged the mechanical approval given u/s. 148B. 47. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment order is void ab initio as the mandatory prior approval was granted mechanically and in total contravention of binding jurisdictional precedents u/s. 148B and CBDT order u/s. 119 dated 15.07.2022. He submitted that the record reveals a fatal contradiction between the premises on which section 151 sanction was obtained and the eventual basis on which the assessment was concluded. He submitted that the Revenue is legally barred from reopening the assessment unless the escaped income was represented in the form of an "asset" exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs. To overcome this statutory hurdle, the Assessing Officer and the Addl. CIT represented to the DGIT(Inv) that the seized material contained entries of loans taken as well as given with the latter specifically qualifying as an 'asset' under the Explanation to section 149(1)(b) of the Act. Accordingly the DGIT was induced to grant the 10 year extended jurisdiction. However, the final asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion order does not demonstrate the independent perusal of material and does not carry recital of reasons, in view of the statutory presumption u/s. 114(e) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 if it is established that all the relevant material were duly put up for perusal before the authority, then the sanction cannot be considered as vitiated. He accordingly submitted that this ground raised by the assessee should be dismissed. 51. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. The grievance of the assessee in the instant case is that the mandatory approval u/s. 148B of the Act was given mechanically and without application of mind. A perusal of the record shows that this ground was never raised before the Ld. CIT(A). Further, it is also not a legal issue and requires verification of facts from the record. Therefore, at the threshold itself this ground is not admitted for adjudication. Even otherwise also, nothing has been placed on record to suggest that the Assessing Officer or Addl. CIT did not g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the author of HCB Shri Rohit Shah is computer illiterate and could not have maintained or explained Tally software operations. Further there were certain internal contradictions in the depositions. He submitted that the core documents were never actually produced or seen by Shri Karan Shah and other signatories of the statement during the statement recording. Further, the HCB and V89/CON files are dumb documents because they lack PANs, addresses or any identifying particulars of the parties. Therefore, without corroborative evidence such as third party confirmations, buyer's affidavits or the recovery of actual physical cash these rough notings cannot be treated as speaking documents. He submitted that the Assessing Officer has relied heavily on third party statements while denying the assessee's request for cross-examination. He submitted that the Ld. CIT(A)'s findings are fundamentally perverse as he relied on a circular logic that treats a post-search confession as contemporaneous evidence. He submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has completely ignored the submission of the assessee regarding the technical impossibility and internal contradictions of the deponents. He submitted th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e recovery of actual physical cash these rough notings cannot be treated as speaking documents. He submitted that in the instant case the buyers have categorically denied to have paid any on-money in the statements recorded u/s. 131(1A) of the Act. 59. So far as the findings of the Assessing Officer that the author of the Cash Book Shri Rohit Manilal Shah confirmed that he maintained the records under the specific instructions of the Directors and held the keys of the premises is concerned, he submitted that Shri Rohit Manilal Shah subsequently furnished an affidavit dated 28.02.2024 retracting his sworn statement recorded during the search which was rejected by the Assessing Officer on the ground that all the affidavits are mere afterthought and against the facts which are already established during the search. Relying on various decisions and the circulars issued by the CBDT from time to time, he submitted that the Assessing Officer cannot simply ignore the affidavit and he must apply his mind, verify the contents and specifically discredit the evidence through enquiry u/s. 131 or 133(6) of the Act before rejection. However, in the instant case the Assessing Officer has not co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sactions recorded in the books, therefore, it is logical inference that the other part would also belong to the assessee and its group. Thus, it is apparent that the seized documents / materials are related to the assessee and its group. He submitted that the assessee and the group during search and post-search proceedings had accepted and deciphered the seized documents and on-money receipts. The assessee helped in creation of the Digital Cash Book, has duly correlated noting / entries in seized records with the survey nos, names of the buyers, etc. Under these circumstances, the assessee cannot turnaround and contend that the seized documents do not relate to Viraj group as the two premises referred hereinabove are not owned by them. Merely because the ownership of the two premises referred hereinabove are of third parties, the possession and control thereof was exclusively with Viraj group and duly accepted by the key persons of the group during the course of search action and statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act. He accordingly submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld. 61. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... its group. Therefore, it is apparent that the seized documents / materials are related to the assessee and its group. We further find the assessee and the group during search and post-search proceedings had accepted and deciphered the seized documents and on-money receipts. The assessee had helped in creation of the Digital Cash Book (DCB), has duly correlated noting / entries in seized records with the survey nos, names of the buyers, etc. Under these circumstances, it cannot be accepted that the seized documents do not relate to Viraj group on the ground that the two premises referred hereinabove are not owned by them. Merely because the ownership of the two premises referred hereinabove are of third parties, the possession and control thereof was exclusively with Viraj group and duly accepted by the key persons of the group during the course of search action and statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in making various additions on the basis of the seized documents found from the above two premises. The ground No.8 is accordingly dismissed. 62. After he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xpenses against these receipts citing the assessee's failure to provide verifiable details such as the names, PANs, or addresses of the payees. He submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer relying on incriminating seized material specifically the Handwritten Cash Book (HCB) and the Digital Cash Book (DCB) over the assessee's regular books and third party affidavits. He, however, held that the Assessing Officer has erroneously ignored the payment side entries in the HCB which evidenced the expenses. He, therefore, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hariram Bhambhani and Golani Brothers and various other decisions held that only the profit element is taxable. After analyzing the group's weighted average profit ratios and considering the assessee's plea regarding the distorting effect of high government compensation in regular books, an arbitrary profit rate of 17% was applied to the quantified receipts. So far as the sale of flats / shops are concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to estimate the profit @ 15%. Thus, he granted partial relief to the assessee. 69. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....section 132(4A). 71. Relying on various pages of the paper book, he submitted that the registration records prove that the assessee was the buyer in 14 specific entries yet the HCB fictitiously treats the assessee as the seller which is a logical and legal impossibility. Similarly the handwritten cash book records 13 entries involving properties not owned by the assessee as per public records, therefore, it is impossible for a a non-owner to receive sale premiums. He submitted that in 37 instances the HCB records buyer 'A' as the party whereas registered public documents prove buyer 'B' executed the transaction stripping the HCB of any evidentiary reliability. Similarly, the handwritten cash book lists 62 entries for which no corresponding transaction exists in the registration records proving the entries are purely speculative or unrelated. He submitted that if the Revenue's theory is that when part is true, the whole is also true, then they must equally accept the inverse legal necessity. He submitted that when a significant part is proved to be factually and legally impossible, the integrity of the whole is destroyed. 72. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer to tax these in the hands of the assessee. He submitted that taxing @ 17% of the receipt is fundamentally perverse and legally unsustainable since these are predicated on dumb documents that lacks even a shred of corroborative evidence. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) fundamentally erred by attempting to split the difference. Although he has correctly recognized the existence of expenses he failed to address the threshold question of identity. Reiterating his earlier submissions, he submitted that it is highly impossible that the assessee was receiving on-money for properties on dates when the registered deeds prove that the assessee was actually the purchaser. He submitted that when the properties are neither owned nor bought or sold during the year under consideration, the same cannot give a rise to receiving any on-money. Relying on various decisions, he submitted that the entire addition should be deleted. 75. So far as the grounds of appeal No.22 to 28 are concerned, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer in the assessment order while discussing the issue of 'V A/c' entries in handwritten cash book observed that these transactions are distinct ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s originating from the exact same Handwritten Cash Book. He submitted that if a single seized document is identified as a cash book recording the rotation of funds, the peak credit theory must be applied to the document as a whole. Further the Ld. CIT(A) did not adjudicate upon the assessee's specific plea for inclusion of the opening peak balance from assessment year 2013-14 in the computation for assessment year 2014-15. He submitted that there is no justification as to why 'V A/c' entries are treated under a separate 'peak' from 'VR1' entries or why both are treated as distinct from the on-money business receipts when all entries are recorded chronologically in the same document. Therefore, in a search based assessment, the character of a cash book is immutable. If the HCB is the primary evidence for unrecorded business receipts (on-money), then any unexplained 'V A/c' or VR1 entries within that same book are inherently part of the same business cash flow. He submitted that the handwritten / digital cash book for the years under appeal contains 25,541 entries in all receipts and payments but only a fraction of these have been selectively mined for gross additions. When the Asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded in the assessee's letter dated 21.07.2023. He submitted that when the Assessing Officer categorically records in para 12.9 of the assessment order that the ownership of these survey nos. is accepted by the assessee vide post search submissions dated 21.07.2023, therefore, the Revenue cannot logically and legally estopped from claiming in para 12.5 that the corresponding payment side entries in the same letter and document are unverifiable. He submitted that under the principle of mutuality of evidence, the Revenue cannot 'blow hot and cold' by treating a document as a speaking record for the purpose of taxation but as a 'dumb record' for the purpose of relief. 81. So far as the various decisions relied on by the Ld. CIT-DR are concerned, he submitted that all these decisions are distinguishable and are not applicable to the facts of the present case. 82. Relying on various decisions placed in the case law compilation, he submitted that where a continuous, chronological record of both receipts and payments exists, then the Hon'ble Courts have consistently held that the net 'peak' or profit element is the only taxable component as taxing the gross receipts would amount to a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elied on by the Ld. CIT(A) are concerned, he submitted that those decisions are distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the present case. All those cases relate to the manufacturing concerns or selling firms to support the proposition that only profit element in the on-money should be taxed. However, in the instant case the on-money in real estate is the cash premium for the same asset that has already been sold through a registered deed. There is no purchase component to on-money and it is pure profit derived from market value exceeding the circle rate or registered value. He submitted that the assessee cannot claim a second presumptive layer of cost against this incremental receipt without demonstrating (a) what specific additional costs were incurred to earn the on-money and (b) that such costs are not already claimed in the accounted books. 85. The Ld. CIT-DR submitted that it is the settled proposition of law that for claiming any expenditure as genuine business expenditure the onus is always on the assessee to satisfy the Income Tax Authority with necessary evidence to substantiate that the expenditure has been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as held that the assessee was unable to establish that payments had in fact been made. This is on the basis that the identity of the recipients and their addresses is not forthcoming nor is the identity of the persons, who made the payment of such huge amounts, is forthcoming. Besides the loose papers do not indicate clearly whether or not the money has been paid. The documents indicated seeking of funds and/or reimbursement of funds. This, by itself, cannot establish that the money has been actually expended. The assessment order also records the fact that the appellant had also not produced the individuals who had made said payments and/or produced their details. If the person alleged to have made payments were produced, the cross examination would have possibly thrown light on the genuineness of such claims." 87. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Orissa High Court in the case of Tarini Terpuline Productions vs. CIT reported in (2002) 124 Taxman 876 (Orissa), he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that secret commission paid to agents cannot be allowed when the assessee declined to disclose identities of agents or correlate payments with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mbers but also was looking after the day to day financial and administrative matters of the group. Further, the statement recorded of Shri Karan Shah on 24.04.2023 has been signed by all the other members of the group i.e. Shri Rajendra Rasiklal Shah, Vilas Rasiklal Shah and Viraj Vilas Shah. He submitted that the various employees and key members of the group have corroborated the version of Shri Rohit M Shah. 91. So far as the argument of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the statements were recorded under pressure and duress is concerned, he submitted that the assessee failed to bring any evidence on record to show that the statements recorded were under duress. He submitted that the group is financially strong group which has wherewithal to take legal recourse in real time against any unfair practice by the Department. However, there is no such evidence. He submitted that the search was conducted u/s. 132 of the Act on 20.04.2023. The statements of Shri Karan Shah and Shri Rohit Shah were recorded on 23rd and 24th April, 2023. The statement of Shri Karan R Shah recorded on 23.06.2023 i.e. is almost 60 days later. In his statement Shri Karan Shah had once again corroborat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry recorded in the handwritten cash book even explaining the details as to where these cash books were kept and how he would go there each day to record the cash entries and tear away the rough slips. Although such statement was recorded subsequently, however, all these affidavits were afterthought. Relying on various decisions, he submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in restricting the addition of on-money to 15% on flats / shops and 17% on plots / lands. 95. So far as the addition u/s. 69A of the Act on account of V A/c is concerned, he submitted that on verification of data by the Assessing Officer from the DCB it was found that apart from the entries for on-money, there are further set of entries with narration V A/c. During the post search findings, these entries were classified under the loans. The Assessing Officer noted that in these entries with narration V A/c from the handwritten cash book, there was mention of short names of individuals / entities on debit as well as credit side. Although all these entries are recorded with specific names, however, the assessee failed to provide PAN and addresses of the parties and asked the department to provide the detail....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submitted that apart from the entries for on-money and entries with narration V A/c, there were other entries having narrations VR1, survey numbers, accommodation entries, stamp and other miscellaneous entries. These VR1 survey number, accommodation entries etc had payment side with almost matching amount. The Assessing Officer took these entries for computation of peak credit. However, the Ld. CIT(A) after giving detailed finding has upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, the same should be upheld. He accordingly submitted that the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of on-money, VR1 etc entries on the basis of peak credit u/s. 69A and V A/c entries u/s. 69A should be upheld and the grounds raised by the assessee be dismissed and the grounds raised by the Revenue be allowed. He also relied on the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Hynoup Food & Oil Ind. (P) Ltd reported in 150 Taxman 194 (Guj) ii) CIT vs. Sai Metal Works reported in 11 taxmann.com 61 (P&H) iii) M.G. Pictures (Madras) Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 263 ITR 83 (Mad) iv) M.G. Pictures (Madras) Ltd. vs. ACIT repo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oney received by the assessee from sale of lands and plots in respect of 100 entries pertaining to the assessment year 2014-15 which are sold during the year and which remained to be offered to tax. Similarly, he added an amount of Rs. 7,21,81,100/- in respect of on-money in case of 38 entries pertaining to the sale of land/plot for which no details such as survey number etc were prepared by the assessee. The Assessing Officer further noted that, apart from the on-money receipts, there are another set of receipts side of entries out of 556 entries which comprises of accommodation entries, survey number payments, stamp, VR1, V A/c and miscellaneous. Applying the theory of peak credit, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 7,41,39,862/- u/s. 69A of the Act. Apart from the above, the Assessing Officer, on the basis of entries with narration V A/c from the handwritten cash book, which mentions the short names of individuals/entities and contains both debit as well as credit side entries, made addition of Rs. 31,01,47,793/- on the ground that the assessee failed to provide identity of the persons, PANs, complete names and addresses, nature and purpose. 99. We find in appeal the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on-money should have been added and the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in restricting the same to 17% for land / plots and 15% for flats / shops. It is his submission that the Ld. CIT(A) out of the total amount of on-money has allowed up to 85% as expenses which essentially allows the assessee to deduct the same expenses twice i.e. once in the regular books and again as an estimation against the unaccounted cash income. According to him, the on-money is not merely separate turnover stream requiring further cost deduction. It is an incremental realization which unless proved otherwise represents incremental profit. Since the assessee in the instant case has not discharged the onus cast on it, therefore, the entire amount should be added. It is also his submission that for claiming any expenditure as an allowable expenditure, the onus is always on the assessee to discharge the burden. However, the assessee in the instant case has not discharged that burden. Therefore, no expenditure out of such unaccounted money should be allowed. 102. So far as the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in granting relief by applying the Peak Credit Theory to V A/c is concerned, he submitted that the same is not a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sible to maintain one common pool of cash to compute separate and fragmented peak and the Assessing Officer's own terminology mandates a unified consolidation. 106. A perusal of the reasons for reopening the assessment u/s. 147 / 149(1)(b) for assessment years 2015-16 and 2017-18 shows that the Revenue, to assume jurisdiction over time barred years, has treated the V expenses (payment side) entries as tangible assets (loans given) exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs. We find the Assessing Officer in para 7.1 vide letter dated 02.09.2024 addressed to the assessee while supplying information / documents, copy of which is placed at page 7513 to 7523 at page 6 of his letter has mentioned as under: "7.1 The case of the assessee is covered under clause (b) of section 149(1) of the income Tax Act. 1961. The relevant portion of the said section is reproduced hereunder: (b) if three years, but not more than ten years, have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year unless the Assessing Officer has in his possession books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income chargeable to tax, represented in the form of- (i) an asset, (ii)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the Revenue proved that these persons / parties did not pay any cash or any on-money, the receipts legally cannot be classified as external business on-money. Consequently, they default to the exact same legal status as the V A/c entries i.e. the assessee's own unexplained funds. Since both are the assessee's own money rotating in the same book, therefore, they must be merged into the same peak. 110. A perusal of the assessment order shows that huge amounts have been added by the Assessing Officer on the basis of seized documents that the assessee has received huge on-money on account of sale of plots / land / flats / shops. However, a perusal of the assessment order nowhere shows that there is any corroborating evidence of actual cash changing hands. We find the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lavanya Land Pvt Ltd (supra) has held that addition on the basis of mere seized entries without corroboration of actual cash changing hands are invalid. The Hon'ble High Court while dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue at para 21 of the order has observed as under: "21. Thereafter, in paragraph 20, the Tribunal considered the merits and once again, at gre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....counts changed hands between the parties, no addition could therefore be made u/s. 69C of the Act to the income of the assessee. Considering the entire facts brought on record, we have no hesitation to hold that even on merits, no addition could be sustained. 22. We do not think that this case is any different from the one considered by the Division Bench in the case of M/s. Arpit Land Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Ambit Reality Pvt. Ltd. The Assessment Year in the case of M/s. Arpit Land Pvt. Ltd. was 2008- 09 and in the case of M/s. Ambit Reality Pvt. Ltd., it was 2007-08. The controversy was identical. The Division Bench, having concluded that no substantial question of law arises for consideration in the Appeals by the Revenue in the case of identical land transactions of two assessees involved in Income Tax Appeal Nos. 83 of 2014 and 150 of 2014, then, a different conclusion is not possible. We do not think that the shift in the stand of the Revenue carries its case any further. We are of the opinion that the Revenue has rightly been faulted for its approach by the Tribunal. The above are pure findings of fact and consistent with the material placed on record. Thus, the jurisdic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in receipts as well as payment side and further entries are noted under 'V Exp' on payment side and these entries are altogether ignored by the AO while making addition in the hands of the appellant. On one hand, the AO has treated and considered these noting / entries as appellant own money for want of details of PAN, address, etc. of the parties stated therein and on the other hand, has only considered the receipt side of the noting / entries, which is not correct and contrary to the stand taken by the AO in respect of third category of entries as stated hereinabove for which the AO has made addition on peak credit basis. The entries under heading 'V a/c.' on both receipts and payments appears to be cash loan transactions, however, the onus lies on the appellant to prove the same by furnishing details of the parties from whom loans are taken in cash, if any, by giving their complete details, which the appellant has failed to provide and even the seized records do not contain any further records of these parties whose only names are mentioned in the seized records Hence, the AO has correctly held these as appellant 'own money'. However, the fact remains th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g of the peak is kept on record and the same is added to the returned income as unexplained money u/s. 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is hereby initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of Rs. 7,41,59,862/-." 114. Since the Revenue in the instant case has not challenged the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that these funds are the assessee's own funds rotating in a cycle and the Assessing Officer has explicitly accepted that the seized documents constitute a single, common cash book and has granted peak credit for the vast majority of the entries (approximately 97%), therefore, we find merit in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that taxing the gross receipts out of accepted common pool is not correct and violates the doctrine of real income. The only possible theory to tax the real income in our opinion is to go for peak theory. 115. We further find the Revenue as per ground of appeal No.15 has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of K.P. Abdul Majeed reported in 414 ITR 531 (Ker). We find the Revenue has relied on this decision to argue that since the assessee failed to provide the PANs, addres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in making addition of the peak credit. Of course the same has to be confined to the peak credit in the respective years and not on each of the accounts. This is the only concession possible on the assertion of the Department that the deposits were for money laundering. The destination of the amounts which were deposited and later withdrawn having not been disclosed or substantiated; it is not reasonable to assume that the entire amounts would have been disbursed, with only the commission appropriated. Virtue among thieves is an adage which cannot be imported, as a principle, to statutory assessment of income to tax. 16. Money laundering can also be for oneself and there can be no presumption that it is for others, especially when the assessee refuses to divulge the details of the persons to whom the money was distributed. When the assessee contested the proceedings with a stout denial and nothing more; the various accounts being found to have been opened and operated on behalf of the assessee, the entire deposits therein has to be treated as his income. One Assessing Officer for a solitary Assessment Year did just that. However, the Department having not filed an appeal fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t justified. 118. A perusal of the assessment order shows that despite the Assessing Officer's own observation in para 9.4 that the Digital Cash Book (DCB) did not specify entity names and posed a challenge to impute the income of a particular entity, still the Assessing Officer made a conscious and substantive decision to assess both the vast majority of the peak entries (25,318) and the entire V A/c and on-money on gross addition basis in the hands of the flagship company Viraj Estates Pvt Ltd. The Assessing Officer consciously chose not to assess these amounts in the hands of the individual directors or other sister concerns. The explicit statutory language of section 69A mandates that an addition can only be made if the assessee is found to be the owner of the money. By invoking section 69A to tax the V A/c and on- money entries in the hands of Viraj Estates Pvt Ltd, the Revenue has issued a binding statutory declaration that Viraj Estates Pvt Ltd is the absolute owner of this entire common pool of funds. We therefore find merit in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the Revenue cannot claim Viraj Estates Pvt Ltd as the owner of funds for the purpose of ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... asks for a peak set-off. 121. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the Assessing Officer has made certain additions on the ground that the assessee has received on-money in 14 specific instances. However, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed the following details with evidence to substantiate that the assessee has not sold the property but in fact has purchased the properties i.e. it is a buyer: List of property entries where assessee is a buyer VIRAJ ESTATES PVT. LTD. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 S N Date AY Particulars (As per Assessment order) Receipt S.no in AO order Buyer (as per registration department) Seller (as per registration department) 1 24-05-2013 2014-15 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.909 NSK 67,00,000 18 Viraj Estates Pvt. Ltd. Umar Abdul Raheman Kokani 2 24-05-2013 2014-15 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.909 NSK 31,00,000 19 Viraj Estates Pvt. Ltd. Umar Abdul Raheman Kokani 3 19-06-2013 2014-15 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.909 NSK 5,01,000 26 Viraj Estates Pvt. Ltd. Umar Abdul Raheman Kokani 4 02-05-2013 2014-15 MAHESH HANDGE S.NO.909 NSK 5,01,000 13 Viraj E....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2023-24 SN Date AY Particulars (As per Assessment order) Receipt S.no in AO order Buyer (as per registration department) Seller (as per registration department) 1 20-12-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT (Cash received for Sno 52 Nashik Dilip C Shah) 1,00,00,000 2 VIRAJ ESTATES PVT LTD KANHAIYYA TAMBOLI 1,00,00,000 122. We find force in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that it is legally and logically impossible to purchase and receive premium from himself. Since this is a registered public record, the order of the Assessing Officer to make addition on the ground that the assessee has paid on-money for sale of land is not correct. 123. Similarly we find additions have been made on account of on-money received by the assessee for properties sold whereas the Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the following details with evidence to substantiate that the assessee is not the owner of the following properties: List of entries in HCB where assessee is not the owner VIRAJ ESTATES PVT. LTD. ASSESSMENT YE....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....SLE S.NO.256 NSK FLAT 27,05,950 5 13-05-2022 VISHWAS MANDLIK S.NO.257 NSK FLAT -1201 14,37,354 6 02-05-2022 VISHWAS MANDLIK S.NO.257 NSK FLAT -1201 4,88,550 52,58,854 124. We further find although the Assessing Officer in the instant case has made certain additions on the ground that the assessee has received on-money on certain transactions which are not recorded in the books of account, however, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the following details which are the entries in HCB to substantiate that no corresponding transactions in official registration records has taken place for the period under consideration: List of entries in HCB with no corresponding transactions in official registration records for the period under consideration M/s Viraj Estates Pvt Ltd ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 S. NO. Date AY Particulars (As per assessment order) Receipt 1 14-08-2013 2014-15 ASHOK AGRAWAL SADI S.NO.250 MHASRUL 35,00,001 2 21-09-2013 2014-15 ASHOK AGRAWAL SADI S.NO.250 MHASRUL 32,50,000 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....NO.24 NSK 2,50,000 32 23-08-2013 2014-15 SHAILESH B KATI (MUMBAI) S.NO.24 NSK 50,000 33 19-08-2013 2014-15 NEHALKUMAR K SHAH S.NO.261 NSK EXP. 18,000 34 19-10-2013 2014-15 VIJAY PATIL Dr (VIJAY CHEDA) S.NO.53 NSK 11,000 4,06,43,101 List of entries in HCB with no corresponding transactions in official registration records for the period under consideration M/s Viraj Estates Pvt Ltd ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2017-18 S. NO. Date AY Particulars (As per Hand written cash book) Receipt 1 04-03-2017 2017-18 NIWARA BUILDERS S.NO.967 NSK 32,50,000 2 16-05-2016 2017-18 SHIVAJI SAHANE S.NO.47 DEOLALI 20,00,000 3 27-10-2016 2017-18 SHYAM NANDKUMAR SANAP S.NO.360/557 M.BAD 31,000 21-04-2016 2017-18 GAUSUK KOKANI (MUMBAI) S.NO.571 NSK 80,00,000 01-06-2016 2017-18 IQBAL KHATIB S.NO.571 NSK 10,00,000 1,42,81,000 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2020-21 S. NO. Date AY Particulars (As per Hand written cash book) Receipt 1 16-04-2019 2020-21 SONU MAN....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs (As per assessment order) Receipt Buyer (as per registration department) 1 04-05-2019 SONU MANWANI S.NO.806 NSK 25,00,000 TEJPAL PARASMAL BORA 2 14-06-2019 SONU MANWANI S.NO.806 NSK 5,00,000 TEJPAL PARASMAL BORA 3 23-01-2020 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.155 NSK TDR 50,00,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 4 23-01-2020 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.155 NSK TDR 42,50,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 5 24-10-2019 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.155 NSK P-11 to 13 36,75,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 6 24-01-2020 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.155 NSK TDR 27,50,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 7 30-09-2019 ABHAY NAHAR S.NO.155 NSK 25,00,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 8 24-10-2019 SHRINEK SURANA S.NO.155 NSK P-11 to 13 23,25,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 9 01-10-2019 ABHAY NAHAR S.NO.155 NSK 20,04,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 10 19-10-2019 ABHAY NAHAR S.NO.155 NSK 20,00,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 11 05-11-2019....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,63,500 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 33 14-10-2019 ABHAY NAHAR S.NO.155 NSK 2,00,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 34 03-12-2019 ABHAY NAHAR S.NO.155 NSK 1,32,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 35 06-01-2020 ABHAY NAHAR S.NO.155 NSK 1,00,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 36 23-12-2019 ABHAY NAHAR S.NO.155 NSK 5,000 VARSHABEN VIJAYBHAI/ GOPALBHAI VINUBHAI KANANI 5,02,33,500 126. Similarly, while explaining the individual cases the Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed the following details to substantiate that the following properties have been treated as sold on which on-money has been received whereas infact these are the properties purchased by them as buyer and they are not the sellers: List of property entries where assessee is a buyer RAJENDRA R SHAH S N Date AY Particulars (As per Hand written cash book) Receipt Buyer (as per registration department) Seller (as per registration department) 1 25-10-2013 2014-15 RAJARAM RAMCHANDRA BENDKULE S.NO.930 WADIVARHE 16,92,8....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....As per Hand written cash book) Receipt Buyer (as per registration department) Seller (as per registration department) 1 24-06-2019 2020-21 VIKRAM D KAPADIYA S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 70,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 2 21-06-2019 2020-21 VIKRAM D KAPADIYA S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 50,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 3 09-08-2019 2020-21 VIKRAM D KAPADIYA S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 50,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 4 13-02-2020 2020-21 DEEPAK BAGAD S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 50,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 5 29-06-2019 2020-21 VIKRAM D KAPADIYA S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 40,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 6 30-12-2019 2020-21 DEEPAK BAGAD S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 35,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 7 02-03-2020 2020-21 DEEPAK BAGAD S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 30,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 8 06-01-2020 2020-21 DEEPAK BAGAD S.NO.149 GANGAPUR 15,00,000 Karan Shah & others Sunita Nimse & others 9 08-11-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT (S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....V 2 06-01-2017 2017-18 NILESH PATEL TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 6,00,000 AVINASH YADAV 3 08-03-2017 2017-18 SUHAS BHAVSAR S.NO.135 VILHOLI - S.NO.135 VILHOLI 4,64,000 SANJAY RAMNIKLAL SHAH 4 27-10-2016 2017-18 VINIT JAIN TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 4,28,520 AVINASH YADAV 5 18-08-2016 2017-18 VISHAL V SHAH TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 2,50,000 AVINASH YADAV 6 27-10-2016 2017-18 VISHAL V SHAH TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 2,00,000 AVINASH YADAV 7 11-01-2017 2017-18 NILESH PATEL TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 2,00,000 AVINASH YADAV 8 31-12-2016 2017-18 VISHAL V SHAH TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 1,43,780 AVINASH YADAV 9 31-08-2016 2017-18 VISHAL V SHAH TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 1,11,000 AVINASH YADAV 10 18-08-2016 2017-18 VISHAL V SHAH TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 1,00,000 AVINASH YADAV 11 25-08-2016 2017-18 VISHAL V SHAH TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 1,00,000 AVINASH YADAV 12 23-08-2016 2017-18 VISHAL V SHAH TDR - S.NO.252 DEOLALI 50,000 AVINASH YADAV 13 27-01-2020 2020-21 UMESH TANDLE S.NO.38 VILHOLI 10,001 MATRU TEMPAL CON....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....H KHANDARE P - 408 TO 412 7,50,000 Sarika Sali 5 30-07-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT PRAKASH KATGHARE P - 408, 412 5,00,000 Sarika Sali 6 22-09-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT VISHAL GARUD P - 376,378 4,00,000 Navneet Vyas 7 29-10-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT PRAVIN GADAK PATIL P NO 81 & 144 30,400 Pratiksha mahesh patil 8 12-10-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT Dr DEVTE P - 461,462 26,00,000 Pooja Deore & Jaideep Patil 9 05-05-2022 2023-24 PRAKASH KHANDOR S NO 49 N DASAK P-408to412 5,00,000 Sarika Sali 10 03-06-2022 2023-24 PRAKASH KHANDOR S NO 49 N DASAK P-408to412 5,00,000 Sarika Sali 11 11-05-2022 2023-24 PRAKASH KHANDOR S NO 49 N DASAK P-408to412 5,00,000 Sarika Sali 12 02-04-2022 2023-24 PRAKASH KHANDOR S NO 49 N DASAK P-408to412 4,00,000 Sarika Sali 13 20-04-2022 2023-24 SUJATA MURHAR S NO 49 N DASAK P-376to378 50,000 Navneet Vyas 77,95,400 List of property entries in HCB where buyer name does not match with registration details KARAN RAJENDRA SHAH S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....SH NAGARE/HEMANT PAREKH S.NO.890 NSK 45,87,800 8 28-05-2019 2020-21 MANGESH NAGARE/HEMANT PAREKH S.NO.890 NSK 22,10,000 9 17-06-2019 2020-21 MANGESH NAGARE/HEMANT PAREKH S.NO.890 NSK 15,00,000 10 08-06-2019 2020-21 MANGESH NAGARE/HEMANT PAREKH S.NO.890 NSK 5,26,000 11 13-06-2019 2020-21 MANGESH NAGARE/HEMANT PAREKH S.NO.890 NSK 4,75,500 12 23-11-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT - ADITYA BAFANA S NO 887 NASHIK 2,50,00,000 13 16-01-2023 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT - SATISH KULKARNI S.NO.18 WADALA 92,00,000 14 25-01-2023 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT - ADITYA BAFANA S NO 887 NASHIK 65,00,000 15 19-07-2022 2023-24 BIPIN BATAVIYA S.NO.890 NSK 15,00,000 16 01-11-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT - BIPIN BATAVIYA S.NO.890 NSK 15,00,000 17 21-09-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT - BIPIN BATAVIYA S.NO.890 NSK 10,00,000 18 08-10-2022 2023-24 SURVEY NO PAYMENT - IQBAL KHATIB S.NO.18 WADALA 5,00,000 6,30,91,500 List of entries in HCB with no corresponding transactions in official registration reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ars (As per Hand written cash book) Receipt 1 31-05-2016 2017-18 SHWETA MACHAR S.NO.304 JALALPUR 8,00,000 2 31-03-2017 2017-18 SHREYAS SAKHALA S.NO.1729 ADGAON 5,00,000 3 04-06-2016 2017-18 SHWETA MACHAR S.NO.304 JALALPUR 4,00,000 4 09-01-2017 2017-18 SHWETA MACHAR S.NO.304 JALALPUR 1,50,000 5 11-01-2017 2017-18 SHWETA MACHAR S.NO.304 JALALPUR 50,000 6 07-06-2016 2017-18 ULHAS PATIL S.NO.21 GANGAPUR 49,00,000 7 09-05-2016 2017-18 AMOL ASHOK KULKARNI S.NO.937 WADIVARHE P-25 7,76,000 8 12-04-2019 2020-21 DHARMENDRA J SHAH S.NO.25 CHINCHOLA 30,00,000 9 23-12-2019 2020-21 BAJIRAO ABU GAIKWAD S.NO.150 VILHOLI 20,00,000 10 12-08-2019 2020-21 RITESH VASTUPAL SHAH S.NO.937 WADIVARHE 10,00,000 11 13-02-2020 2020-21 NARENDRA GOLIYA S.NO.150 VILHOLI 10,00,000 12 21-09-2019 2020-21 RITESH VASTUPAL SHAH S.NO.937 WADIVARHE 5,00,000 13 17-10-2019 2020-21 RITESH VASTUPAL SHAH S.NO.937 WADIVARHE 5,00,000 14 29-11-2019 2020-21 RITESH VASTUPAL SHAH S.NO.937 WADIVARHE 5,00,000 15 16-01-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....P S.NO.57 SINNAR P-59 50,00,000 4 28-08-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 43,50,000 5 15-10-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 22,00,000 6 01-10-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 20,00,000 7 11-10-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 15,00,000 8 11-09-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 10,00,000 9 02-10-2019 2020-21 SANAP S.NO.57 SINNAR P-29 10,00,000 10 21-09-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 5,00,000 11 19-10-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 5,00,000 12 19-11-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 5,00,000 13 30-10-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 4,30,000 14 17-10-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 3.00,000 15 24-12-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 3,00,000 16 19-10-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 2,00,000 17 07-12-2019 2020-21 SANJAY JADHAV S.NO.57 SINNAR P-1&2 2,00,000 18 10-03-2020 2020-21 DATTAT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion together with the remaining entries specifically including the 'V A/c' and 'V Exp' entries, the unidentified entries and all alleged on-money receipt and payment entries relating to plots, lands, flats and shops. No entry shall be excluded or maintained in a separate pool. 2) The unified common peak must legally crystalize entirely in the hands of the present assessee which according to the Revenue is the flagship company. No separate addition on the basis of the entries found in the DCB / HCB is to be made in the hands of any of the entities / individuals of the Viraj group and the entire peak addition is to be made in the hands of the present assessee i.e. Viraj Estates (P) Ltd. 3) Since the seized HCB is a continuous record containing entries prior to the assessment years in question, therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to compute the peak balance as on the last date of assessment year 2013-14. This closing peak of assessment year 2013-14 shall be brought forward and applied as opening peak balance for the computation of peak for assessment year 2014-15. 4) The Assessing Officer shall calculate the running daily cash balance by using the ....