TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 971
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2024, I.T(SS).A. Nos. 179 &180/Ahd/2024, I.T(SS).A. Nos. 108/Ahd/2024, I.T(SS).A. Nos. 106/Ahd/2024, I.T(SS).A. Nos. 174/Ahd/2024, I.T(SS).A. Nos. 162/Ahd/2024 and I.T(SS).A. Nos. 107/Ahd/2024 Dilip Prasad, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad Versus Gordhanbhai Babaldas Patel, Mehsana; Mita Sanjay Sheth, Nima Somabhai Patel, Gordhanbhai Babaldas Patel, Amathabhai Bababhai Patel, Gordhanbhai Babaldas Patel, Ahmedabad; Dilip Prasad, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad Versus Chandubhai Babaldas Patel, Gandhinagar and Amrutbhai Babaldas Patel Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant: Shri Darshan B. Gandhi, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR ORDER PER BENCH: These bunch of appeals have been filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections have been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, (in short "Ld. CIT(A)"), Ahmedabad vide orders dated 14.08.2024, 16.08.2024 passed for A.Ys. 2019-20 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 2. The Assessing Officer (AO) had not made any independent inquiry u/s. 133(6) or by issuing summon u/s. 131 of the Act from the purchaser with respect to alleged on-money paid for purchase of land at Godhavi of Rs. 3,55,69,687/- to appellant. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 3. Your appellant also reserves its right to submit details in connection with the aforesaid additions / disallowances as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. 4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." 5. The brief facts of the case, as borne out from the assessment order, are that the assessee, Shri Alap Somabhai Patel, filed his return of income for A.Y. 2019-20 under section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act on 24.06.2020 declaring total income of Rs. 10,29,860/-. Subsequently, a search and seizure action under section 132 was carried out....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee tried to explain the entries as projections relating to investments and liabilities, the statement itself established that the seized page related to actual land transactions. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee had acknowledged that the figures were in crores and that the calculations pertained to land dealings. 9. To verify the contents of the seized document, the Assessing Officer conducted independent enquiries from the Any ROR database and identified several sale transactions involving the assessee and his family members in Godhavi village. The Assessing Officer tabulated the transactions survey-wise and purchaser-wise. These transactions included Survey Nos. 958, 957, 952, 953, 960/2, 907/2, 908/2 and 944. The lands were sold to parties such as Rajesh Balvantbhai Brahmbhatt, Rupesh Balvantbhai Brahmbhatt, Jankhit Chandubhai Prajapati, Janak Janki Infrastructure LLP and others. The total land area involved in the transactions was approximately 63,782 sq. meters and the aggregate documented consideration recorded in sale deeds was around Rs. 14.91 crore. 10. The Assessing Officer thereafter compared the seized calculations with the actual land sale tra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ily members. 13. The assessee further explained that the figure "Rs.40 crore" represented the estimated value of lands and properties already held by the family as on 31.03.2020, whereas the figure "Rs.30 crore" represented future proposed investments in lands situated at villages Palodia, Khatraj and Sanavad. According to the assessee, the entire page represented rough projections of future investments, liabilities, debts and loans and had no relation whatsoever with actual sale consideration received from Godhavi lands. 14. The assessee heavily relied upon his statement recorded under section 132(4) to contend that he had never admitted receipt of unaccounted cash consideration. It was specifically argued that in reply to Question No.14 during search, the assessee had categorically stated that the seized pages represented projections of "debts, investments, loans taken and loans to be taken". The assessee also emphasized that he had nowhere admitted that the figures represented actual sale consideration or cash receipts from land transactions. According to the assessee, the Assessing Officer selectively relied upon portions of the statement while ignoring the complete expla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the assessee group, clearly established that the notings represented actual sale consideration and not merely future projections as claimed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee himself had admitted during the course of search that the seized page was in his own handwriting and that the figures mentioned therein were in crores. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee had also admitted in his statement that the notings related to land transactions undertaken in Godhavi region. The Assessing Officer therefore held that the assessee's subsequent attempt during assessment proceedings to portray the document as merely a family projection sheet prepared after Rakshabandhan was an afterthought lacking credibility. The Assessing Officer specifically noted that the seized page contained systematic numerical calculations directly relatable to actual land area sold by the assessee and corresponding value calculations at the rate of Rs. 25,000 per sq. meter, which could not be treated as casual future estimations. The Assessing Officer further observed that the figures appearing on the seized paper substantially matched the land area and transaction patt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing material found from the possession of the assessee himself. According to the Assessing Officer, the seized document recovered from the assessee constituted primary evidence and the same could not be disregarded merely because corresponding documents were not found from purchasers during search. 21. The Assessing Officer also found fault with the assessee's reliance on his statement under section 132(4). According to the Assessing Officer, although the assessee attempted to rely upon selective portions of his statement to contend that the notings represented projections of debts and investments, the overall tenor of the statement clearly established nexus with actual land transactions in Godhavi. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had admitted that the seized pages related to his land dealings and that the figures were in crores, and therefore the explanation subsequently advanced during assessment proceedings was inconsistent with the surrounding facts and circumstances. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee's explanation was a "well-cooked and woven story" devised only after issuance of show-cause notice to avoid tax liability arising from incriminating....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the family, particularly involving his mother and sister, who objected to sale of family properties acquired by late Shri Somabhai Patel. It was contended that on Rakshabandhan dated 03.08.2020, family discussions took place wherein the assessee assured his mother and sister that equivalent lands would be reacquired in future. According to the assessee, the notation "34000" represented approximately 34,579 sq. yards being the share of his mother and sister in the lands already sold and the figure "25000" represented merely an estimated future market rate of land after five years. Accordingly, the figure "85 crore" was only a future projected investment amount required to reacquire equivalent lands for family members. 25. The assessee also furnished before the CIT(A) detailed charts showing ownership pattern, survey numbers, dates of sale, sale consideration and area sold in respect of Godhavi lands. It was specifically emphasized that the seized page referred only to approximately 34,000 sq. yards whereas the actual lands sold by the assessee group aggregated substantially larger area. According to the assessee, this itself disproved the Assessing Officer's assumption that the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd other courts laying down that additions under section 153A must necessarily be based upon incriminating material found during the course of search. The assessee relied upon the decision in the case of Sanjay Aggarwal v. DCIT and other judgments to contend that where no incriminating material is found during search, no addition can be sustained merely on the basis of post-search assumptions or inferences. The CIT(A) also referred to judicial precedents explaining the scope of section 69A and emphasizing that ownership and possession of unexplained money must first be established before invoking section 69A. 29. The CIT(A) further noted that admittedly no cash, bullion, unexplained investment, diaries, parallel accounts or corroborative evidence representing alleged on-money receipts were found either from the assessee or from purchasers of the lands. The CIT(Appeals) noted that the assessee was never found in possession of any alleged cash generated from sale of Godhavi lands and no evidence of deployment or utilization of such alleged cash was brought on record by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(Appeals)therefore found substance in the contention that the addition had been mad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... referred to the case of Shri Jankit C. Prajapati, who was one of the major purchasers connected with Survey Nos. 952, 953, 907 and 908 situated at Godhavi village. The CIT (Appeals) observed that despite a search being conducted in the case of Shri Jankit C. Prajapati on the very same date as the search conducted upon the assessee, no document, diary, loose paper, digital record, cash trail or parallel accounting evidence was found showing payment of any cash component for purchase of the Godhavi lands. The CIT(A) considered this aspect highly significant because if, as alleged by the Assessing Officer, lands had actually been purchased at a rate of Rs. 25,000 per sq. meter involving huge on-money payments, some corroborative evidence would ordinarily have surfaced from the purchaser's side. The absence of such evidence in the case of Shri Jankit C. Prajapati therefore weighed heavily with the CIT(A) while evaluating the correctness of the Assessing Officer's conclusions. 34. Similarly, the CIT(A) also considered the evidentiary position relating to purchasers such as Smt. Sonal Rajeshbhai Khandwala and the Brahmbhatt group, who were purchasers in respect of Survey Nos. 958, 95....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... represented merely projections relating to future investments and liabilities and not actual undisclosed sale consideration received from Godhavi land transactions. 37. While passing the order, CIT(Appeals) made the following observations: "4. In this case, before moving to the technical/legal ground, it is convenient to adjudicate the ground of appeal related to merit of the case in the following paras. 5. The ground of appeal no. 3 and 7 relate to the addition made by the AO on account of unexplained investment in the form of land at Godhavi under Section 69 of the act for an amount of Rs. 3,55,69,687/-. 5.1 It is observed that similar addition for the same land with respect to unexplained investment in land at Godhavi for Rs. 17,28,11,249/- was made in the hands of Smt. Sonal Rajesh Khandwala. On careful consideration of relevant facts on record, it is observed that entire addition in the case of appellant is made based upon a loose paper found during the course of search at Shri Alap Patel which pertains to alleged Godhavi transactions. The identical issue has been considered by undersigned while adjudicating appeal of Smt. Sonal Khandwala for A.Y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat unaccounted transaction in land deal is amounting to Rs. 78,98,02,495/- While coming to this conclusion, the AO has stated that seized material speaks the authenticity of document as well as transaction of land. These evidences are self-speaking and have been executed in accordance with seized documents. The AO further observed that 50% part in Godhavi land Survey No. 958 and 959 relates to the appellant which means that actual consideration is Rs. 19,20,12,500/- (50% of 38,40.25,000/-) whereas document value of deal was Rs. 1,92,01,251/- hence differential amount of Rs. 17,28,11,249/- represents unaccounted investment by the appellant and accordingly addition was made u/s. 69 of the Act. 5.2 While passing the assessment order of Shri Alap Patel for year under consideration (the appeal against such order is also pending before undersigned), his AO has also referred to relevant loose paper which contains noting of 85, 40 and 30 (crores) which is actual consideration received by assessee for three sets of deals. For the first deal of Godhavi, 34,000 x 25,000 = 85 is mentioned which means that deal value is for 85 crores and land rate is Rs. 25,000/- per sq mtr The AO has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in such seized material pertains to his debts/investments and are mere projections. Shri Alap Patel in his statement has nowhere admitted that he or Appellant has transacted Godhavi land at value over and above documented value Il is observed that relevant question and other questions in such statement are completely silent with reference to name of the appellant or admission of on-money receipt from the appellant. The statement recorded u/s.132(4) has evidentiary value as same is recorded during the course of search and same is the first statement wherein explanation of any loose paper is provided by assessee spontaneously. It is settled legal law that statement recorded during the course of search has to be read as a whole and it cannot be interpreted as per convenience of the AO. It is relevant to refer to decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Glass Lines Equipments Co. Ltd. v Commissioner of Income-tax [2001] 119 TAXMAN 813 wherein it was held that material is to be read as whole and not in parts. The relevant extracts of the order is provided herein below: "............................................................ 9. In view of the sett....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... admitted on-money receipt for sale of Godhavi land to the appellant. In view of this specific fact, contention of the appellant that no cross examination was provided during assessment proceedings cannot be accepted as it is purely academic in nature. Had the statement of Shri Alap Patel contain any admission of on-money receipts, issue of cross examination would have been relevant. 5.6 While making impugned addition, the AO has relied upon seized material found during the course of search at Shri Alap Patel. The seized material merely contains noting "Godhavi" and also contains notings like, "85, 40, 30 and aggregate 155" which according to the AO is Rs. 155 Crores being the deal value of Godhavi Land. The entire seized material nowhere contains the word "cash". Further, such seized material does not contain name of Appellant or name of other buyers who have purchased land at Godhavi at relevant period. Even no signature of any party is found in such seized material. This seized material nowhere contains date or land survey number which are transacted between the appellant and Shri Alap Patel. The land survey number of other lands transacted at Godhavi by Shri Alap Patel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d during the course of search at Shri Alap Patel which proves actual cash trail of Rs. 155 crores. It is relevant to mention that a search u/s. 132 of the Act was also carried out in case of Shri Jankhit Prajapati (one of the purchasers of Godhavi land) on 08-12-2020 and even in his order, the AO has not referred to any cash trail which can prove that he has made any on-money payment to Shn Alap Patel for Godhavi land. It is further observed that search u/s.132 of the Act was also carned out in B-Safal Group including Shri Rajesh Brahmbhatt & Rupesh Brahmbhatt on 28.09.2021 (one of the purchasers of Godhavi land) and no evidences were brought on record to prove that even such purchaser has made on-money payment to Shri Alap Patel. These relevant facts clearly prove that the AO has not brought any evidence to support his contention that land at Godhavi transacted by Appellant involves on-money as alleged by her. It is observed that while passing the assessment order no statement of Appellant or other co-owners/purchaser were referred by the AO, if any recorded by Investigation Wing, to support the contention that land at Godhavi involves on-money payment/receipt by buyer/sellers. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tel's debts (to be repaid) and investments Le, the 'money outflow as admitted. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that against this, the right-hand side of the sheet must contain the 'money inflow' to him. The contents on the right-hand side are actually calculations pertaining to the recent land deals done by him in Godhavi region of Ahmedabad district. In his statement he has given details of his recent land deals in Godhavi region as follows:" It can be seen from above finding that there is involvement of presumption and such presumption is without any supporting evidences. The AO has observed that left side of above referred loose paper are list of Alap Patel's debt (to be repaid). This left side contains various notings like Manishbhai, Prashant, Happy, Palodiya, Nimeshbhai, etc., but has failed to establish such notings with actual transaction/debt of Shri Alap Patel. The AO has not brought any clinching evidence for notings on left side but accepted the contention of Shri Alap Patel regarding projection of his debt hence on very same logic, there is no evidence to suggest that right side of paper containing "Godhavi" stands for on-money recei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts sale dood He thus made certain addition to assessee's taxable income It was noted that construction of commercial complex was still in progress and, thus, rate of floor space mentioned in seized documents was a mere projection which did not represent any completed or materialized transaction - Moreover, Assessing Officer did not make any enquiry from said employee or from buyers of flats in respect of actual price paid by them Whether in aforesaid circumstances, impugned addition made merely on basis of an unsigned and undated seized document was not sustainable Held, yes [Paras 40, 43 and 46] [In favour of assessee] 5.12 It is relevant to refer to decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad ITAT in the case of Priya Blue Industries Private Limited vide IT[SS]A 4, 29/Ahd/2023 dated 28/06/2024 wherein it is held as under: "17.5. Next one is excel sheet found from the backup of the computer namely "ACCOUNT SETTLED AS ON 12-7-2018 UP TO OPPORTUNITY This excel sheet represents only a rough working and the sheet was prepared for an estimated basis and none of the parties has executed any transactions. No such amount has been received either by Sanjay P Mehta or the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he sheet is merely a dumb document. The shoot is dressed up with theoretical numbers, the amount so-called profil cannot be derived from the sheet without corresponding evidence. Therefore the impugned addition made on dumb document and not backed with any corroborative evidence is unstainable law and rolled on the following decisions: ACIT-Vs-Dharmendrasinh Waghele Tax Appeal 1539 of 2011 (Gul ACIT-Va. Manav Infrastructure P Ltd IMSSJA 314/Ahd/2012 and ACIT -Vs-Bhagvanbhal K Ajara ITISSJA 194/Ahd/2013 It is well settled that NO addition can be made merely on the basis of contents of seized materials Rellance is placed on the following decisions: CIT-Vs-Maulik Kumar K Shah 307 ITR 137 [Gull Common Cause -Va Uol-394 ITR 220 (SC) ITO-Vs-Bharat A Motha-60 faxmann.com 1 [Gull 17.7. Thus Ld Senior Counsel pleaded that neither the addition by the Ld AO of Rs. 11,29,61,022/ nor the estimation made by the Ld CIT(A) of Rs. 4.10 orores are not sustainable in law. ........................ 19. We have heard rival submissions in detail and perused the materials on record ................. 19.5. At this juncture we would further like to refer the prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alleged document was seized in the course of search conducted in the case of Umiya Group on 04.03.2010. This document, in which matter was typed in the form of Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between assessee-firm through its partner Dipak Prajapati and the land owner for the purchase of land bearing Survey No. 1001/18 and 1000 at Kalol admeasuring 15,500 sq yards agreeing to purchase at Rs. 4,500/- per sq. yard. Ld. Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, observed that there is a purchase of alleged land admeasuring 15,500 sq yards at the cost of Rs. 1,70,00,000/-in the regular books of accounts. Ld. Assessing Officer was convinced that the alleged purchase of land was actually purchased al Rs. 6,97,50,000/- which he calculated by applying the rate of Rs. 4,500/- per sq. yard as appearing in the seized MOU. He accordingly made an addition of Rs. 5,27,50,000/- and completed the assessment. 12. When the issue came up before the Id. CIT(A), he took a view that, in general parlance, in the business of real estate, there is an element of on-money which is normally to be carried out in cash. Ld. CIT(A) adopted a ratio of 40:60, wherein 40% of the deal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her valuable article or thing is found in the possession or control of any person in course of a search, it can be assumed that such books of accounts other documents etc. belongs to such person, contents in the books of accounts or documents are true. No doubt such an evidence is an admissible evidence, but not a conclusive one. Presumption of belonging and its genuineness are rebuttable one. Hon'ble High Court in the case of Dharmendrasingh R. Waghele (supra) has also propounded that though section 132(4A) of the Act uses expression "may presume", meaning thereby that such presumption is rebuttable one. In the present appeal, we have been called upon to construe and interprets these pages and arrive at a conclusion whether any transaction having nexus with the business transaction of the assessee can be inferred. The assessee has placed on record details in tabular form exhibiting total shops available in Balaji Mall and how these shops have been sold in F.Y.2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10. The assessee has also compiled these details floor- wise i.e. availability of shops on ground floor, second floor, third floor and fourth floor. It has placed on record date of sales....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have noticed in these papers The Id GIT(A) has appreciated these papers and arrived at a conclusion that these are rough work without any clear indication as to what the said numbers really lead to or relates to. On an analysis of complete material including statement of director recorded under section 132(4) and the explanation of the assesse extracted (supra) during the course of assessment proceedings, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) has appreciated the facts in right perspective way, and department is unable to goad us to arrive at any other logical conclusion. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this appeal of the Revenue. It is dismissed. 15. We further observe that Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Dharmendrasinh R Waghela Prop. M/S. Narendra Roadlines (supra) has also observed as under:- "2. The issue arises in following factual background. During the course of search operations carried out at the residential and business premises of the respondent assessee, certain documents were seized. On the basis of such documents, the Assessing Officer desired to make addition. The assessee, however, during the course of the assessment, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are:- 1. ACIT vs. Satyapal Vasan 295 ITR (AT) 352 [ITAT - Jabalpur] 2 CIT vs Girish Chaudhary (2008) 296 ITR 619 (Mad.) 3 CIT us. S.M. Aggarwal (2007) 293 ITR 43 (Del.) 4 Jaya S. Shetty vs ACIT (1999) 69 ITD 336 (Mum) 5 Bansal Strips P. Ltd. vs. ACIT (2006) 99 ITD 177 (Del.) 18. From these decisions, it transpires that if an addition is to be made on the basis of a seized document, then it must be supported by some identification having any nexus with the unaccounted business activity of the assessee. The nature of transaction should reflect some direct or indirect connection with the accounted or unaccounted activity of the assessee. If a document is silent or the ingredients could not be linked, then the said document was considered as "a dumb document". Placing reliance on these decisions, inter- alia we are of the view that the Revenue Department had not made sufficient enquiry so as to establish that in fact the said document had unearthed a concealed business activity of the assessee. In the absence of any such evidence, the addition so made by the AO remained un corroborated, hence, we hereby reverse the findings and allow this ground." 5. Counsel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....capacity to fulfill the contract. However, the alleged MOU, which is unsigned and undated, do not stand for as a valid contract and the same is not enforceable by law. 17. It seems that Id. Assessing Officer has stretched a link emanating from the seized material and has formed up a complete story along with taking a basis of impugned land which was purchased in the later part of the year and applying the conditions embedded in the alleged MOU on to the impugned land purchase transactions thereby calculating the purchase consideration of the land in question at Rs. 6,97,50,000/-as against Rs. 1,70,00,000/-shown in the books. We notice that Id. Assessing Officer has completely disregarded relevant facts which includes the date of incorporation of the assessee-firm, actual date of registration of the land purchase document dated 12.03.2008 and the date of conversion of land in question, i.e., 01.02.2008, coupled with that Id. Assessing Officer also has not enquired from the alleged sellers about the value of transactions entered into for the sale of land. More so, Id. Assessing Officer has also ignored the glaring fact that proposal for purchasing the impugned land was broug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... diary actually represented the sales made by the assessee. Such onus had not been discharged by the revenue. Mere enmins in the seized material were not sufficient to prove that the assessee had indulged in such a transaction The inference of the Assessing Officer that the assessee has received 'on-money, was merely based on suspicion and surmises and there was no material whatsoever to support the conclusion of the Assessing Officer that the assessee had in fact received any fan-money. The addition as made by the Assessing Officer being based on more presumptions and assumptions and without any corroborative evidence could not be sustained..." 19.8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause A Registered Society) Vs. Union of India, reported in (2017) 77 baxmann.com 245 (SC) held as follows: "...Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reed with section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Unexplained money (Loose papers) Raids were conducted an two business groups and incriminating materials in form of randon sheets and loose papers, computer prints, hard disk, pen driver ellc were found Evidence of certain highly incriminating money transactions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... therefore the entire addition of Rs. 11,29,61,022/ is liable to be deleted in the hands of the assessee company. In the result the Ground No.4 raised by the assessee is fully allowed and Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is fully dismissed." 5.13 It is relevant to refer to decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Anil Bhalla in IT APPEAL NO. 1415 OF 2009 Dated 01/02/2010 wherein it is held as under.- "Section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961-Unexplained expenditure -Block period 1-4-1989 to 10-02-2000 Where no independent material or evidence had been brought on record by Assessing Officer to establish that notings/jottings recorded on loose sheet of paper seized during search represented an unaccounted transaction and Tribunal held that entries in question belonged to some company, inasmuch as assessee could explain from books of such company that these projects were undertaken by it, and Tribunal held that loose sheet did not represent any expenditure incurred by assessee, deletion of addition based on loose sheet, treating it as unexplained expenditure in assessee's hands was justified (in favour of assessee) As no indepen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue of the impounded loose sheet mentioned elsewhere, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause (A Registered Society) and Others vs. Union of India and Others in Writ Petition Civil Appeal No. 505 of 2015 has observed as under:- 16. With respect to the kind of materials which have been placed on record, this Court in V.C. Shukla's case (supra) has dealt with the matter though at the stage of discharge when investigation had been completed but same is relevant for the purpose of decision of this case also. Thus Court has considered the entries in Jain Hawala diaries, note books and file containing loose sheets of papers not in the form of "Books of Accounts and has held that such entries in loose papers/sheets are relevant and not admissible under Section 34 of the Evidence Act, and that only where the entries are in the books of accounts regularly kept depending on the nature of occupation, that those are admissible. 17. It has further been laid down in V.C. Shukla (Supra) as to the value of entries in the books of account that such statement shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability, even if they are relevant a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourse of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter in which the Court has to enquire was subject to the salient proviso that such entries shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability it is not, therefore, enough merely to prove that the books have been regularly kept in the course of business and the entries therein are correct it is further incumbent upon the person relying upon those entries to prove that they were in accordance with facts. 28. It is apparent from the aforesaid discussion that the loose sheet of papers are wholly irrelevant as evidence being not admissible u/s. 34 so as to constitute evidence with respect to the transactions mentioned therein being of no evidentiary value. 29. Moreover, the Assessing Office did not make any inquiry from buyers of flat in respect of actual prices paid by them. He also did not make any other inquiry in order to corroborate his conclusion. There is no incriminating evidence to show that the assessee has sold the flats at a higher rate. 30. In our understanding of the facts, the impounded louse sheet can at the most be termed as "dumb document" which did not contain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he aid of the confessional statements made by the representative, neither the Assassing Officer nor the CIT (Appeals) co-related the sale with that of the assessees by establishing that the safes were during the same period in relation to the properties which offered similar advantages, in fact, their contention was that this demonstrated a uniform trend or a pattern in the industry of cash transactions." The SLP filed by the Department against the above decision is also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 101 taxmann.com 180 [2019]. 5.16 In view of above discussion, it is observed that entire addition has been made by the AO without bringing clinching evidence to prove that the appellant has made on-money payment towards purchase of land as alleged by the AO. The entire addition made by the AO is therefore deleted based upon detailed findings given herein above, which is summarized as under:- (i) The loose material seized from the premises of Shri Alap Patel nowhere contain name of the appellant or other purchaser, signature of either party, land survey number which are transacted by Shri Alap Patel. Even such loose paper no where contain date ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....prove that notings on right side actually refers to sale value of Godhavi land by Shri Alap Patel. (ix) Various judicial pronouncements referred to above clearly supports the contention of the appellant. 5.17 In view of above factual discussion and legal matrix of the case, entire addition made by the AO for Rs. 17,28,11,249/-is deleted. Thus, the grounds. of appeal no. 3 to 5 are allowed. 5.2 It is observed that appellant is also one of the sellers of part land at Godhavi for which impugned addition has been made by the AO which is similar to addition made in case of Smt. Sonal Khandwala being one of the purchasers of the same land. As issue involved in present appeal is identical, following the decision referred supra, addition of Rs. 3,55,69,687/- made in present case is deleted. Thus, the grounds of appeal no. 3 & 7 are allowed. 6. The grounds of appeal no. 1, 2, 4 to 6 relate to the validity of the Assessment Order passed under section 153A of the Act. It is observed that since the grounds of appeal no. 3 & 7 related to merit of the case, has been decided in favour of the appellant, therefore, this ground become infructuous, hence not adjudi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appeals) suffers from serious factual as well as analytical infirmities which render the appellate order unsustainable in its present form and necessitate restoration of the matter back to the file of the CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication. 41. At the outset, we observe that the entire basis adopted by the CIT(Appeals) for granting relief to the assessee is substantially founded upon the findings recorded in the cases of the purchasers of the lands, particularly purchasers such as Shri Jankit C. Prajapati, Sonal Rajeshbhai Khandwala and connected parties. The CIT(Appeals) has repeatedly observed that since no incriminating material evidencing payment of on-money was found from the premises of the purchasers and since relief was granted in the purchasers' cases, the addition made in the hands of the present assessee could not survive. However, in our considered opinion, the appellate authority has failed to appreciate that the factual position in the case of the purchasers and the factual position in the case of the present assessee stand on materially different footing. In the present case, admittedly, incriminating loose papers were found and seized from the possession and con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ale of lands and related to proposed sale transactions. However, the CIT(Appeals), while granting relief to the assessee, proceeded on the footing that the loose sheet represented merely future projections for repurchase of lands after the lands had already been sold. In our considered opinion, the CIT(Appeals) failed to reconcile this apparent contradiction arising directly from the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act. 44. Further, it has specifically been pointed out by the Revenue before us that at Question No. 35 of the statement, the assessee had allegedly admitted existence of cash component with respect to sale of properties referred to in the seized document. However, while passing the impugned order, the CIT(Appeals), particularly in the discussion appearing at page 53 of the appellate order, proceeded on the assumption that the assessee had never admitted receipt of any cash component in relation to the land transactions. Prima facie, therefore, there appears to be a serious disconnect between the actual contents of the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act and the factual assumptions proceeded upon by the CIT(Appeals) while granting relief.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces which required detailed examination by the appellate authority. However, from a perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the appellate authority proceeded primarily on the footing that absence of corroborative evidence from the purchasers was sufficient to dislodge the evidentiary value of the seized document found from the assessee's possession. In our considered opinion, such approach is incomplete and does not constitute a comprehensive adjudication of the evidentiary material available on record. 47. Another important aspect which appears to have escaped proper consideration by the CIT(Appeals) is that the statement of the assessee recorded during the course of search proceedings contains separate explanations with respect to the left-hand side and the right-hand side of the seized document. As pointed out by the Revenue, the explanation regarding left-hand side entries appears upto page 364 of the paper-book, whereas later pages and more particularly pages 393-394 deal with the right-hand side entries which formed the very basis of additions made by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(Appeals), however, appears to have considered only selected portions favourable to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h material corroborated or contradicted the explanation advanced by the assessee. In absence of such independent and comprehensive adjudication, the impugned order, in our considered opinion, cannot be sustained. 50. Since various factual aspects arising from the seized document and the statement recorded under section 132(4) have not been comprehensively examined by the CIT(Appeals), we are of the considered view that the interests of justice would be best served if the matter is restored back to the file of the CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to both the sides. 51. Accordingly, in light of the serious factual discrepancies, incomplete appreciation of evidentiary material, apparent misreading of portions of the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, and the need for comprehensive re-examination of the seized document and connected evidence, we restore the matter back to the file of CIT(Appeals) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. The CIT(Appeals) shall independently examine the seized material, the statement recorded from the assessee including Question Nos. 34 and 35, the explanation furnished by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to be quashed. 2. The Assessing Officer (AO) had not made any independent inquiry u/s. 133(6) or by issuing summon u/s. 131 of the Act from the purchaser with respect to alleged on-money paid for purchase of land at Godhavi of Rs. 15,73,36,299/- to appellant. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 3. Your appellant also reserves its right to submit details in connection with the aforesaid additions / disallowances as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. 4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." 55. We note that the facts and issued for consideration are similar as those for A.Y. 2019-20. Since lead matter is hereby restored to the file of CIT(A) for de-novo consideration, accordingly, Department's appeal for A.Y. 2020-21 in IT(SS)A No. 164/Ahd/2024 is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration and assessee's Cross Objection in C.O. No. 48/Ahd/2024 for A.Y. 2020-21 is di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition ignoring the incriminating documents found during the course of search at the premise of one of co-owners/sellers and written in his own handwriting, not appreciating the detailed analysis made by the A.O. in the assessment order. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by deleting the addition by relying on his own decision in the case of Smt. Sonal Rakesh Khandwala who was a purchaser in a different transaction ignoring that any argument put forth by any purchaser/investor will be self-serving and the incriminating evidences found and found and seized in one of the sellers premise cannot be ignored. 4. The Revenue craves leave to add/alter/amend and/or substitute any or all of the grounds of appeal." 58. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in Cross Objection: C.O. No. 49/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2019-20) "1. The Assessing Officer (AO has not complied with the provisions of Sec. 153D of the Act. AO passed Assessment Order without obtaining valid approval u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act. The approval granted u/s. 153D should be after application of mind and not mechanically. Therefore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rdingly, in light of the observations above, Department's appeal in IT(SS)A Nos. 169/Ahd/2024 and 170/Ahd/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes (being restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration in the light of our observations in the preceding paragraphs) and C.O. Nos. 49/Ahd/2024 & 50/Ahd/2024 filed by the assessee are being dismissed as not pressed. Now we shall come to Department's appeal in the case of Amrutbhai Babaldas Patel in IT(SS)A No. 159/Ahd/2024 (for A.Y. 2019-20) and IT(SS)A No. 160/Ahd/2024 (for A.Y. 2020-21) and assessee's Cross Objection in C.O. No. 45/Ahd/2024 and 46/Ahd/2024 (for A.Ys. 2019-20 & 2020-21) 61. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal: IT(SS)A No. 159/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2019-20) "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,03,55,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act on account of on-money received by the assessee towards his share in the non-agricultural land at Godhavi sold to the builder group. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition ignoring the incriminating documents found during the course of search at the premise of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the purchaser with respect to alleged on-money paid for purchase of land at Godhavi of Rs. 3,55,69,687/- to appellant. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 3. Your appellant also reserves its right to submit details in connection with the aforesaid additions / disallowances as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. 4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." C.O. No. 46/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2020-21) "1. The Assessing Officer (AO has not complied with the provisions of Sec. 153D of the Act. AO passed Assessment Order without obtaining valid approval u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act. The approval granted u/s. 153D should be after application of mind and not mechanically. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 2. The Assessing Officer (AO) had not made any independent inquiry u/s. 133(6) or by issuing summo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onal Rakesh Khandwala who was a purchaser in a different transaction ignoring that any argument put forth by any purchaser/investor will be self-serving and the incriminating evidences found and found and seized in one of the sellers premise cannot be ignored. 4. The Revenue craves leave to add/alter/amend and/or substitute any or all of the grounds of appeal." IT(SS)A No. 158/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2020-21) "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 15,73,36,562/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act on account of on-money received by the assessee towards his share in the non-agricultural land at Godhavi sold to the builder group. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition ignoring the incriminating documents found during the course of search at the premise of one of co-owners/sellers and written in his own handwriting, not appreciating the detailed analysis made by the A.O. in the assessment order. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred by deleting the addition by relying on his own decision in the case of Smt. Sonal Rakesh Khandwala who was a purchaser in a different transaction ignoring that any argum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e quashed. 3. Your appellant also reserves its right to submit details in connection with the aforesaid additions / disallowances as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. 4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." Next batch of cases related to Nima Somabhai Patel (sister and co-owner in Godhavi Land) with respect to A.Y. 2019-20 and 2020-21 (Department's appeal in IT(SS)A Nos. 171&172/Ahd/2024 and assessee's Cross Objection in C.O. No. 51&52/Ahd/2024) 66. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal: IT(SS)A No. 171/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2019-20) "1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,55,69,687/- made by the Assessing Officer u/ s.69A of the Income Tax Act on account of on-money received by the assessee towards his share in the non-agricultural land at Godhaui sold. to the builder group 2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition ignoring the incriminating documents found during the course of search at the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom the purchaser with respect to alleged on-money paid for purchase of land at Godhavi of Rs. 3,55,69,687/- to appellant. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 3. Your appellant also reserves its right to submit details in connection with the aforesaid additions / disallowances as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. 4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." C.O. No. 52/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2020-21) "1. The Assessing Officer (AO has not complied with the provisions of Sec. 153D of the Act. AO passed Assessment Order without obtaining valid approval u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act. The approval granted u/s. 153D should be after application of mind and not mechanically. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 2. The Assessing Officer (AO) had not made any independent inquiry u/s. 133(6) or by issuing s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 2. The Assessing Officer (AO) had not made any independent inquiry u/s. 133(6) or by issuing summon u/s. 131 of the Act from the purchaser with respect to alleged on-money paid for purchase of land at Godhavi of Rs. 16,26,33,479/- to appellant. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 3. Your appellant also reserves its right to submit details in connection with the aforesaid additions / disallowances as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. 4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." Further, in this batch we should deal with the case of Amathabhai Bababhai Patel for A.Y. 2020-21 (Department's Appeal in IT(SS)A No. 161/Ahd/2024 70. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal: IT(SS)A No. 161/Ahd/2024 (A.Y. 2020-21) "1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... were required to be completed within twelve months from the end of the financial year in which the search was conducted, i.e., on or before 31.03.2022. According to the assessee, any assessment order passed after the said date was void ab initio being time barred. 73. The ld. counsel further submitted that in the present case the Assessing Officer of the searched person as well as the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the "other person" against whom proceedings under section 153C were initiated was one and the same officer. Therefore, there was no occasion or legal requirement for "handing over" of seized material by one Assessing Officer to another Assessing Officer as contemplated under section 153C of the Act. It was argued that once the Assessing Officer for both entities was common, the extended period of limitation contemplated under the second limb of clause (ii) of the third proviso to section 153B(1), which is linked to the date of handing over of seized documents to the Assessing Officer of the other person, could not be invoked by the Revenue. 74. The ld. counsel contended that in such a situation only the first limb of clause (ii) of the third proviso to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shed as barred by limitation. 79. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The principal legal objection raised by the assessee is that the assessments framed under section 153C of the Act are barred by limitation prescribed under section 153B of the Act on the ground that the Assessing Officer of the searched person as well as the "other person" was one and the same and, therefore, there was no requirement of handing over of seized material as contemplated under section 153C of the Act. According to the assessee, since the search in Popular Group was conducted in October 2020, the limitation for completion of assessments expired on 31.03.2022 and consequently the impugned orders passed thereafter are liable to be quashed as time barred. In support of the aforesaid contention, reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Vijay Bihari Kandhari v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax read with the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Super Malls (P.) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax. 80. However, after thoughtful consideration of the statutory framework contained under sections 15....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r records satisfaction regarding the incriminating nature and relevance of material qua the third party. In large group search matters involving multiple entities, voluminous records and interlinked financial transactions, such examination and satisfaction is a detailed and time-consuming statutory exercise which can reasonably be undertaken only after substantial appraisal and examination of seized material relating to the searched group. 84. In this regard, we find considerable merit in the submissions advanced by the ld. Departmental Representative that although physical transfer of documents may not be necessary where the Assessing Officer is common, the independent statutory exercise contemplated under section 153C of the Act nevertheless survives. The absence of requirement of physical transmission of records cannot obliterate the mandatory jurisdictional requirement of recording satisfaction. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears [2014] 43 taxmann.com 446 has categorically held that recording of satisfaction is a sine qua non for initiation of proceedings against a third party under provisions analogous to section 153C of the Act and such satisfaction mus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icer of the searched person and the other person happened to be the same officer. 89. The legal objection raised by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 90. Since the relevant contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee stands dismissed, all the appeals filed by the Department are hereby restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration in light of our discussion in the preceding paragraphs and all the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as not pressed. Now we shall discuss Department's appeals in the case of ACIT vs. Sonal Rajesh Khandwala for A.Y. 2019-20 and 2020-21 in IT(SS)A Nos. 179&180/Ahd/2024 91. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal: IT(SS)A No. 179/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2019-20 "1) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs,77,28,11,249/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s.69 of the Act on account of the assessee's share in on money paid for purchase of non-agricultural land at Godhavi by Builder Group, ignoring the detailed analysis made by the A,O. in the assessment order. 2) The Ld,CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition by ignoring the incriminating documents found du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lation between the instant assessee and the lead matter in the case of Alap S. Patel is that Sonal Rajesh Khandwala in the instant case is the purchaser of the impugned properties in question. In the instant appeals, the Ld. CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee on the ground that the loose materials seized from the premises of Shri Alap S. Patel nowhere contain the name of the assessee i.e. Sonal R. Kahndwala, signature of the assessee and the land survey number with respect to the property / land purchase by the assessee. Further, Ld. CIT(A) also gave relief to the assessee that in case of similar land purchases by other parties viz. Shri Jankhit Prajapati and the B. Safal Group there was no evidence to prove payment of on-money by other purchasers as well. More importantly, Ld. CIT(A) (at Page 46 of his order while giving relief to the assessee i.e. Sonal R. Khandwala) has observed that in the statement recorded by Shri Alap S. Patel under Section 132(4) of the Act, he has stated that such loose paper contains projection. The Ld. CIT(A) further observed that in such statement, Shri Alap S. Patel never admitted that figure noted in the seized material is for the area of land as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Act. AO passed Assessment Order without obtaining valid approval u/s.153D of the Income Tax Act. The approval granted u/s. 153D should be after application of mind and not mechanically. Therefore, it is prayed that the assessment order so passed is bad in law; hence, the same may kindly be quashed. 3. Ground No. 3 Jewellery of Rs. 13,92,727 The Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition u/s. 69 of the jewellery of Rs 13,92,727/- Part of seized jewellery belongs to appellant's wife, who received jewellery at the time of marriage and part jewellery belongs to appellant's sister residing in USA. The jewellery is explained and part of social customs and family status. Therefore, it is prayed that addition of jewellery may kindly be deleted. 4. Ground No. 4 Cash of Rs. 27,98,170/-confirming addition u/s. 69A of the cash of Rs. 27,98,170/- out of seized cash of Rs. 37,00,000/-. The cash is explained and part of pin-money of lady's members, gifts of children, agricultural income of family and part cash belongs to appellant's sister residing in USA. Therefore, it is prayed that addition of cash may kindly be deleted The Id. CIT(A) erred in 5. Gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... separate addition of Rs. 27,98,170/- on account of unexplained cash found during search proceedings. 98. In appeal, the ld. CIT(Appeals) examined the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer as well as the written submissions furnished by the assessee. The ld. CIT(Appeals), while dealing with the addition relating to jewellery, observed that the year under consideration was a search year/abated assessment year since search was conducted on 08.10.2020 and return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 was filed subsequently on 09.02.2022. Therefore, according to the ld. CIT(Appeals), the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in absence of incriminating material was not tenable, as the embargo relating to incriminating material applies only in the case of unabated assessments and not in the case of abated/search assessments. The ld. CIT(Appeals) further observed that the Assessing Officer had already considered the claim of streedhan and family ownership of jewellery in light of CBDT Instruction No.1916 dated 11.05.1994 while framing the assessment. It was noted that out of total jewellery valued at Rs. 3,42,96,768/-, the Assessing Officer had treated only jewellery valu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g references from the seized annexures were furnished before the authorities below. It was contended that the jewellery was received as customary gifts in a well-established Hindu family and the same was fully consistent with social customs and family status. The ld. counsel further relied upon CBDT Instruction No.1916 dated 11.05.1994 and submitted that jewellery found during search to the extent of prescribed limits should ordinarily be treated as explained, particularly in respect of married ladies. It was submitted that the authorities below failed to appreciate the concept of streedhan in proper perspective and mechanically treated jewellery valued at Rs. 13,92,727/- as unexplained despite the fact that the assessee had duly explained the source and nature of the jewellery. The ld. counsel accordingly submitted that the addition sustained by the ld. CIT(Appeals) deserved to be deleted. 102. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. 103. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We have also carefully considered the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(Appeals) in the light ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rther note from the material available on record that as per the details pertaining to earlier years, the assessee had declared around 618 grams of gold and ornaments in or around the year 2009, whereas during the year under consideration the jewellery found during search had substantially increased to more than 4000 grams. In our considered opinion, in the interest of substantial justice, the assessee deserves to be afforded one more opportunity to substantiate his explanation by producing relevant documentary evidences such as declaration before Wealth Tax Authorities, declarations made before statutory authorities, evidence regarding acquisition of jewellery over the years, family declarations, purchase invoices, inheritance details or any other contemporaneous material demonstrating that the assessee and his family members were in possession of such gold ornaments and diamond jewellery from explained and disclosed sources. 107. Accordingly, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore the issue relating to addition of Rs. 13,92,727/- on account of unexplained jewellery to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s made by AO as fresh evidence at the time of hearing of Appeal. 6. Ground: Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." 110. In the instant appeal, while grounds No. 1, 2 have been dealt with in the earlier part of the order and the ground No. 3 was never argued / pressed before us (although in view of decision of Jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Smt. Neelu Sanjay Gupta vs. DCIT in IT(SS)A Nos. 147 & 148/Ahd/2019 for A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07, this issue is squarely covered against the assessee and therefore, we shall deal with ground No. 4 related to alternate claim of the assessee for deduction under Section 54F of the Act. In the instant ground, the assessee has taken an alternate contention that claim of Section 54F of the Act of Rs. 30,58,301/- may be allowed to the assessee since it had purchased plot for constructing Bungalow in residential scheme "Godhavi Goldcrest". However, on going through the records, it is observed that while the assessee has pressed for an alternate claim for deduction under Section 54F of the Act, however, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the provisions of Sec. 153D of the Act. AO passed Assessment Order without obtaining valid approval u/s. 153D of the Income Tax Act. The approval granted u/s. 153D should be after application of mind and not mechanically. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 2. The Assessing Officer (AO) had not made any independent inquiry u/s. 133(6) or by issuing summon u/s. 131 of the Act from the purchaser with respect to alleged on-money paid for purchase of land at Godhavi of Rs. 31,33,30,580/- to appellant. Therefore, the impugned assessment order so passed is bad in law and illegal, hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 3. Your appellant also reserves its right to submit details in connection with the aforesaid additions / disallowances as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. 4. Your appellant craves liberty to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw / delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time, on or before the hearing of appeal." 113. As noted in the earlier part of the order, Gordhanbhai Patel is the ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....riminating documents found during the course of search at the premise of one of co-owners/ sellers and written in his own handwriting, not appreciating the detailed analysis made by the A.O. in the assessment order. 3) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred by deleting the addition by relying on his own decision in the case of Smt. Sonal Rakesh Khandwala who was a purchaser in a different transaction ignoring that any argument put forth by any purchaser/investor will be self-serving and the incriminating evidences found and found and seized. in one of the sellers premise cannot be ignored. 4) The Revenue craves leave to add/ alter/ armed and/ or substitute any or all of the grounds of appeal."" 120. It may be noted that Shri Chandubhai Babaldas Patel is the maternal uncle and co-owner in the said land. In the instant appeal, the Department has challenged the deletion of addition of Rs. 8,28,83,333/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69A of the Act on account of on-money receipt by the assessee towards his share in the non-agricultural land at Godhavi. 121. Since the lead case in the matter has been restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration, and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eals in assessee's case for A.Y. 2019-20 and 2020-21 have been restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration, in the interest of justice, this issue may also be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration with a liberty to the assessee to present it's arguments/giving supporting documents before Ld. CIT(A), as may be deemed appropriate. 125. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 126. In the combined result, (i) IT(SS)A No. 163/Ahd/2024 filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. (ii) C.O. No. 47/Ahd/2024 filed by the Assessee is dismissed. (iii) IT(SS)A No. 164/Ahd/2024 filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. (iv) C.O. No. 48/Ahd/2024 filed by the Assessee is dismissed (v) IT(SS)A No. 169/Ahd/2024 filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes (vi) C.O. No. 49/Ahd/2024 filed by the Assessee is dismissed (vii) IT(SS)A No. 170/Ahd/2024 filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. (viii) C.O. No. 50/Ahd/2024 filed by the Assessee is dismissed. (ix) IT(SS)A No. 159/Ahd/2024 fi....