9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of survey." 3. The assessee is engaged in business of purchase and sale of silver ornaments and also undertaking the work of preparation of ornaments of silver on job-work basis. That on 22-03-1995 the police of Dahod detained a jeep car bearing No. MQU-8181 at Padav circle and found four separate bags in concealed condition the silver weighing 90-027 kg. valued at Rs.5.30 without any purchase bills / vouchers or any other corroborative evidence for genuine holding of the said silver and produced before Police authority. Subsequently, three persons including the assessee claimed ownership of silver. Further, a survey u/s./ 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was carried out by the ADIT (Inv.) Baroda on 16-06-1995. As a result, thereof the excess stock of silver to the extent of 102.886 kg. was detected over and above other irregularities. It was also noticed that the assessee is carrying on unaccounted money lending business and trading of silver bars. The order u/s 144 of the Act was passed on 09-12-1998 pertaining to A.Y. 1996-97 determining total income at Rs.15,31,040/-. Against this order, assessee field appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business of money lending since long time and he gave loan on the basis of gold/silver ornaments mortgaged by the borrowers. Sometimes, the borrower unable to pay the principal amount of said loan, therefore the assessee became the owner of the said mortgaged ornaments by way of which said ornaments sold in due course the assessee earned profit. Ld. CIT(A) has decided this issue in para-7.1 to 7.4 of his, which is reproduced hereinbelow:- "7.1 The assessee is in money lending business and against loans, ornaments are pawned and on non repayment of money lender sells the ornaments and generates profit. The then Assessing Officer determined income under this head at Rs.35,000/-. The learned CIT(A) however, granted a relief of Rs.35,000/-. In set aside proceedings, in the absence of any submission, the amount was added to total income. 7.2 In appeal, it is argued that the addition was deleted by CIT(A) in the first round of appellate proceedings and so the addition be deleted. 7.3 I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the appellant. It is observed hat Hon'ble ITAT for A.Y. 1995-96 on similar issue had held that the CIT(A) had wrongly deleted the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee's appeal is rejected. 10. Last ground is with regard to Rs.7,55,800/- on account of alleged stock on the date of survey. Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that there was no specific question asked about the excess stock of silver weighing 102.886 kg. He further submitted that there was no admission on the part of assessee that there was excess stock of silver weighing 102.886 kg. Ld. AR submitted that there was no basis of having stock of such huge silver weighing 102.886 kg. On the contrary, Ld. DR supported the orders of authorities below and submitted that there is no interference into the order of Ld. CIT(A). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on recode. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has decided this issue in para-9.1 to 9.3 of his order, which is reproduced hereinbelow:- "9.1 At the time of survey conducted on 16-05-1995, unaccounted excess stock of silver weighing 102.886 kg valued at Rs.7,55,800/- was found from the premises of the assessee. In reply to question no 18 recorded at the time of survey, the assessee had admitted that the excess stock of silver is inclusive of unaccounted silver trading business. The unaccounted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .1995-96. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "1. Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal on the ground that the appellant did not appeared in set aside proceedings and also in appellate proceedings against order passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The factual position is that appellant has come to know of adjudication of penalty appeal only from the appellate order so received. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not adjudicating ground relating to addition of Rs.2,74,912/- on account of purchase of silver bars though detailed explanation was given in the course of appellate proceedings on the same. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not adjudicating ground relating to addition of Rs.8,21,000/- on account of alleged investment in purchase of house property though detailed explanation was given in the course of appellate proceedings on the same. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not adjudicating ground relating to addition of Rs.1,68,250/- on account of unexplained cash credits though detailed explanation was given in the course of appellate proceedings on the same. 5. The Ld. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
