9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mantri, CIT-DR ORDER PER BENCH : This bunch of 19 appeals by the assessee(s) & Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-III, Indore dated 21.03.2016, & 25.07.2016, 05.02.2018 pertaining to assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 & 2012-13. 2. All these appeals were taken for hearing simultaneously being interconnected as same relate to a Kalani Group. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal in IT(SS)ANos.99 & 104/Ind/2016(Pankaj Kalani & Dipak Kalani): "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO of Rs. 1,67,63,500/- Rs. 1,43,000/- & Rs. 5,01,500/- on account of unexplained receipt on protective basis without appreciating the facts an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 32,044/- made by the AO as unexplained investment in silver utensils without any documentary evidences given by the assessee. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO of Rs. 1,96,58,000/- on account of unexplained receipt on protective basis without appreciating the facts and evidences brought into light by the AO during assessment proceedings. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,49,75,466/- by holding that the addition made on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) has no relevance. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer in which it was discussed by DCIT-Central circle, Indore in his assessment order that the details appearing on the loose papers LPS-10 and LPS-11 exactly match with the details appearing on the Page 254 of LPS 2/14 taken from the file of A/3 seized during the search by Excise department on Signet group found and seized during the Income tax search at the office of M/s Signet Industries Ltd., containing details of transaction of Shri. Pankaj Kalani and prepared by Shri. Mukesh Sangla? 3.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld.CIT(A} has erred in not considering the fact that in LPS-11, the various transactions entered in different names were admitted as related to the assessee M/s Kalani Industries Priv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction. 3. That the Ld ClT(A) failed to appreciate that section 153 C overrides section 147/148 and thus proceedings which are initiated pursuant to document seized under search & seizure operations in third persons premises can only be under section 153C and not under section 147/148 The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITANos.399/Ind/2019 (Kalani Industries P. Ltd.): "01.That the learned Assessing Officer erred in reassess proceedings to the case under section 148 without applying his mind but on the basis of the direction of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. 02.That the learned Assessing Officer reassessed the case under section 148 on the basis of change of opinion which is evident from the fact the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ignoring the fact that Ld. AO during the assessment proceedings rebutted the contention of assessee in its entirety. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) is justified in ignoring the facts that Ld. AO has established link between seized loose paper/incriminating documents found at the time of the search and established nexus between these seized documents and assessee and therefore, addition was made at time of the assessment proceedings. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, whether Ld. CIT(A) is justified in ignoring the fact the addition was made on the basis proper verification of books of account and enquiry, after giving proper opportunities to the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Flexituff International Ltd. However, in appeals related to substantive proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) has not taken into consideration of the above fact in respect of appeals relating to protective assessments. 4. On the other hand, Ld. counsels for respective assessees opposed the submission of the Ld. CIT-DR but could not controvert the same by bringing any contrary material on record, suggesting that the order of Ld. CIT(A) made in protective proceedings was brought to his notice. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of lower authorities. On consideration of submission of Ld. CIT-DR which could not be controverted by Ld. Representatives of concerned assessees, that the divergent view have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
