9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e found in the course of search. Though the authorities have heavily relied on the statement of the third party, no opportunity of cross examination has been given to the Assessee even though the Assessee has specifically sought for opportunity to cross examine the said third party. While framing the assessment in the case of Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal it has been held that in view of provision of Section 278D r.w.s. 132(4A) of the Act, the onus was one Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal to substantiate the contents of the diary which could not be proved, therefore, entire addition mentioned in the diary has been made in the hands of Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal including the amount which is the subject matter of the present addition made in the hands of the assessee. It is well settled law that the same income cannot be taxed twice. As the entire addition has already been made in the case of Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal in whose possession the incriminating documents were seized, the authorities are precluded from making the additions in the hands of the Assessee. Thus, we are of the opinion that the A.O. committed error in making addition on the basis of diary found at the premises of the third party . Deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the said loan given by the Assessee to Supra Finance has been received the same back in his bank account and the Assessee has charged the interest of in the AY 2014-15 and 2015-16 which was duly shown in the computation of income and as the A.O. made the addition of 20,00,000/- on account of interest income earned @2% on presumptive basis without there being any material available on record to support the said rate of interest, we find no reasons to interfere with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition. Unexplained investment made u/s 69 AND interest on unexplained investment - Loose sheet has been found and seized which was marked as A-1/73 wherein certain amounts have been jotted - HELD THAT:- In the absence of any corroborative evidence, the loose sheet seized during the course of search from the premises of the Assessee which is nothing but a dumb document which did not contain full details about the dates, parties name, absence of signature and in the absence of any corroborative material, could not have been relied by the authorities below. Accordingly, finding merit in Ground of the Assessee, we delete the addition. Addition on account of purchase of spec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hus, the Assessee was having cash balance which can be corroborated from the above documents. Neither the A.O. nor the Ld. CIT(A) have found any defect in the cash flow statement or in the statement of affairs of each year and not brought any adverse material on record to prove contrary against the case of the Assessee. Addition made on the basis of the seized document as interest received and computed the principal amount as unexplained cash investment - A.O. presumed that the said amount as monthly interest @2% per month and based on the entries jotted therein, worked out the principal amount of loan investment by applying interest @24% per annum - HELD THAT:- Considering the rental agreements placed , computation of income and the computation of income of the wife of the assessee, we find merit in the argument of the Assessee's Representative and hold that the authorities below have committed an error in making the addition. In addition to the same, the identical issue regarding the addition based on the loose sheet has been already discussed in detail and deleted the addition for A.Y 2016-17 - By relying on the very same adjudication and the conclusion and applying the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 30/07/2012 declaring income of Rs. 12,45,980/-, therefore, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee. As the assessee has not complied with the notice, the income of the assessee was assessed u/s 153A(1) (b) read with Section 144 of the Act on total income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A (1)(b) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment orders for Assessment Year 2012-13 to 2018-19, the assessee preferred Appeals before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the Appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2016-17 and partly allowed the Appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 and 2018-19. Aggrieved by sustaining the additions, for A.Y 2012 -13 to 2020-21 as against the deletion of the additions, the Department of Revenue filed the Appeal for AY 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 2018-19. ITA No. 1860/Del/2023 (A.Y 2012-13) (Assessee) 5. Ground No. 1 and its sub grounds are regarding the addition of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- made by the A.O. by apply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the premises of the third party and was not in the handwriting of the assessee. The assessee has specifically denied having any transaction with Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal while giving statement u/s 132(4) of the Act. Apart from the same, no such alleged seized diary as copy was given to the assessee and no opportunity of cross examining of Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal has been given to the assessee despite of specific request made by the assessee. Therefore, submitted that the addition made based on the diary found at the premises of third party cannot be sustained. 8. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that, the assessee has not explained the transaction with Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal and based on the diary seized in the premises of Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal coupled with the statement on oath u/s 131(1A) of the Act recorded from Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal, the A.O. has rightly made the addition, thus, sought for dismissal of the above Ground No. 1 its sub grounds. 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The above additions have been made based on the diary seized from the possession of the third party i.e. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal and coup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4A) of the Act, the onus was one Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal to substantiate the contents of the diary which could not be proved, therefore, entire addition mentioned in the diary has been made in the hands of Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal including the amount which is the subject matter of the present addition made in the hands of the assessee. It is well settled law that the same income cannot be taxed twice. As the entire addition has already been made in the case of Sh. Ramesh Kumar Goyal in whose possession the incriminating documents were seized, the authorities are precluded from making the additions in the hands of the Assessee. 12. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the A.O. committed error in making addition on the basis of diary found at the premises of the third party . Accordingly, the additions made by the A.O. which were confirmed by the CIT(A) are here by deleted. Thus, Ground No. 1, 1(a) to 1(d) of Assessee s Appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 are allowed. 13. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No. 1860/Del/2023 is allowed. ITA No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) filed by the assessee 14. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by the A.O. Since there is no change of facts and circumstances, by applying the very same findings and conclusions, we allow the Ground No.1 and its sub grounds of the Assessee. 21. Ground No. 1 to 4 of the Revenue are regarding deleting the partial addition made by t he A.O. on account of unexplained receipts and payments in cash from/to Ramesh Goyal by applying the theory of peak credit. 22. In view of deleting the additions made by the A.O. based on the diary found at the premises of third party in the Assessee s Appeal, the Ground No. 1 to 4 of the Revenue s Appeal challenging the partial deletion of the addition by the Ld. CIT(A) has become infructuous, accordingly the ground No. 1 to 4 of the Revenue are dismissed. 23. In the result, Assessee s Appeal in ITA No. 1862/DEL/2023 is allowed and Revenue s appeal in ITA No. 2038/Del/2023 (A.Y 2014- 15) is dismissed. ITA No. 1863/DEL/2023(Assessee) and ITA No. 2039/Del/2023 (Revenue) (A.Y 2015-16 ) 24. The Ground No. 1 and its sub Grounds of the Assessee s Appeal are regarding addition made by the A.O. based on the diary found at the premises of third party which has been partly confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) by applying peak cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... end) who was also interested in buying the said vehicle in order to avoid the waiting time. Accordingly, the appellant got the refund of Rs. 1,00,000/- from M/s Thirty Six Toyota on 17.10.2014 through cheque and the said proceeds have been credited to the bank account of the appellant maintained with HDFC Bank Account No.06191000034512. It was contended that AO presumed on the basis of receipt for advance booking, the appellant has purchased the said vehicle and made the addition. Further, it was submitted that son of Shri Digvijay Singh had purchased the Maruti Gypsy after raising vehicle Joanom HDFC Bank. The EMIs of Rs. 16,063/- were also paid regularly by the son of the assessee from his account only. After looking into facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that the payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been made by the appellant in cash to book a car from M/s Thirty Six Toyota. The said booking was transferred in the name of Smt. Roma Grover accepting a cheque from her of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 17.10.2014. The said car was registered in her name as evident from the RC registration certificate and she has taken vehicle loan from the Canera Bank. There is nothing on record to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 14,00,000/- is concerned, it is seen from the record that the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition observed that the transaction of Rs. 5,50,000/- on account of purchase of Maruti Car pertaining to Sh. Digvijay Singh son of the Assessee who is a separate assessee and separate proceedings u/s 153C of the Act has been initiated by the A.O. It is not the case of the A.O. that payment of the above transaction pertaining to Sh. Digvijay Khatana has been made by the Assessee, therefore, in our considered opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) rightly directed to consider the said transaction while making assessment in the case of sh. Digvijay Khatana u/s 153C of the Act and deleted the addition of Rs. 5,50,000/- which requires no interference. 32. Further, in so far as addition of Rs. 8,50,000/- is concerned, the said amount has been paid by Ms. Roma Grover who has purchased the car on 10/07/2014, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has not sustained the said addition in the hands of the Assessee. It is the Ground of the Department that the additional evidence has been field by the Assessee but the Ld. CIT(A) has not called for the Remand Report. On going through the order of the Ld. CIT(A) no such men ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 20,00,000/- purely based upon presumption and without any basis. After looking into facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that the appellant had given loan of Rs. 50,00,000/- to M/s Supra Finance through his bank account received the same back in his bank account. It was explained during the appellate proceedigns that the appellant has charged interest amounting to Rs. 364,380 for the A.Y. 2014-15 and Rs. 4,74,660/- for the A.Y. 2015-16 which is-duly shown in the computation of income. Moreover, The AO has made the addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- on account of interest income earned @2% on such loan on presumptive basis. There is no material available on record to support the rate of interest applied. In the absence of supporting evidence, such addition made on presumptive basis can not be sustained. Therefore, addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- is hereby deleted. Accordingly, ground of appeal no. 6 is hereby allowed. 36. Considering the fact that the said loan given by the Assessee to Supra Finance has been received the same back in his bank account and the Assessee has charged the interest of in the AY 2014-15 and 2015-16 which was duly shown in the computation of incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, wherein certain amounts have been jotted and there is no corroborative material/evidence on record to conclude that such document has materialize into transaction giving rise to income of the Assessee which had not been disclosed in the regular books of accounts of the Assessee. The ld. Counsel relying on the several judicial precedents, submitted that the additions made based on the dumb document requires to be deleted. 43. The Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Ground No. 2 of the Assessee s Appeal. 44. We have heard the parties perused the material available on record. During the course of the search, a loose sheet has been found and seized which was marked as A-1/73 wherein certain amounts have been jotted. The said loose sheet is reproduced for the sake of convenience as under:- 45. The Ld. A.O. on going through the above loose sheet inferred that the Assessee had advanced the loan of Rs. 22,00,000/- to Sh. Beju Thakur during the year under consideration and earned interest/commission of Rs. 2,25,000/-. It was the case of the Assessee that Assessee s father is a social worker and several persons of nearby a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad been proved to be income in the hands of the recipient. As a result thereof, the tribunal found no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on the ground that the same were based on valid and cogent materials placed on record and also produced before the Assessing officer during the course of assessment proceedings. The tribunal also noted that all the evidence, materials, explanations were furnished before the Assessing Officer and it is on the basis of such material that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had arrived at the conclusion that no addition was warranted on the basis of the seized diaries. 5. We have examined the impugned order in detail and have also heard the counsel for the parties and we find that the issues sought to be raised before us are purely issues of fact. The tribunal, being the final fact finding authority, has returned a certain set of facts. We find no perversity in such findings and, consequently, no question of law, what to speak of a substantial question of law, arises for our consideration. The appeal is dismissed. 49. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause v. Uni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orroborative material, could not have been relied by the authorities below. Accordingly, finding merit in Ground No. 2 of the Assessee, we delete the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- made on account of unaccounted investment and also delete Rs. 2,25,000/- made on account of interest income. Accordingly, Ground No. 2 of the Assessee is allowed. 51. Ground No. 3 of the Assessee is regarding addition of Rs. 86,000/- made on account of purchase of spectacle and mobile phone as unexplained expenditure u/s 69 of the Act. 52. Based on the seized document marked at A-1/15 placed at Page No. 10 11 of the Paper Book, the Ld. A.O. made addition of Rs. 50,000/- and 36,000/- on account of unexplained expenditure u/s 69 of the Act holding that the Assessee has not offered any explanation during the course of assessment proceedings to prove the source of the same. During the course of the appellate proceedings, the Assessee contended that payment of purchase of the said items have been made from the cash in hand shown in the books of the Assessee and recorded in the statements of assets. The Assessee has also produced the copy of the ledger account of mobile phone and Drishti Eye Care in respect of sp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Appeal. 57. Ground No. 1 to 4 of the Revenue are regarding deleting the partial addition made by the A.O. on account of unexplained receipts and payments in cash from/to Ramesh Goyal by applying the theory of peak credit. 58. In view of deleting the additions made by the A.O. based on the diary found at the premises of third party in the Ground No. 1 of the Assessee s Appeal, the Ground No. 1 to 4 of the Revenue s Appeal challenging the partial deletion of the addition by the Ld. CIT(A) have became in-fructuous, accordingly the ground No. 1 to 4 of the Revenue are dismissed. 59. In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No. 1865/Del/2023 is allowed and Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No. 2040/Del/2023 is dismissed. ITA No. 2588/Del/2023 (Assessee) ITA No. 2815/Del/2023 (Revenue) (A.Y 2018-19) 60. The Ground No. 1 and its sub Grounds of the Assessee s Appeal are regarding addition of Rs. 41,65,110/- made by the A.O. based on the diary found at the premises of third party which has been partly confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) by applying peak credit theory. 61. We have already held in the case of the Assessee for AY 2012- 13 that the addition made on the basis of diary found at the prem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cuments as per the provision of Section 132(4A)/ 292C of the Act, accordingly, the A.O. made the addition which has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). 68. The identical issue regarding the addition based on the loose sheet has been already discussed in detail and deleted the addition for A.Y 2016-17 in ITA No. 1864/Del/2023 while dealing with Ground No. 2 of the Assessee. By relying on the very same adjudication and the conclusion, we delete the above addition of Rs. 22,10,000/- and Rs. 1,78,770/- made by the A.O. on account of unexplained loan and on account of interest/commission earned by the Assessee. Accordingly, the Ground No. 1 2 of the Assessee are allowed. 69. Ground No. 3 of the Assessee is regarding the addition of Rs. 44,32,000/- made by the A.O. u/s 69 of the Act on the basis of the loose sheet marked as A-1/76 seized during the search 70. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the document marked as A-1/76 seized during the search had certain amount jotted and the A.O. presumed that the Assessee made payment of Rs. 44,32,000/- for the purchase of Plot No. 9A NIT, Faridabad, in addition to Rs. 1,32,96,000/- as consideration mentioned in the sale deed. Further s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y u/s 69 of the Act. 76. During the course of appellate proceedings, it was reiterated by the Assessee that the jewellery found at the time of search proceedings and documents seized was out of the gift of 1.5 kg of gold by Assessee s father and remaining jewellery were received by the Assessee and his family members on various occasion such as marriage. It was also contended that the old jewellery has been replaced and exchanged. 77. The Ld. CIT(A) while rejecting the contention of the Assessee held as under:- The fact of the case and material on record has been gone through. On-going through the assessment order (page No. 11/12) it is found that various documents were found and seized wherein details of jewellery purchased on 27.10.2018 for Rs. 1,07,24,720/- have been clearly recorded. Such documents give complete details of nature of jewellery item purchased, their weight, rate, labour charges and total amount. On the perusal of the same, it is observed that these documents are not in respect of replacement/exchange of old jewellery against new jewellery items. It is clearly a case of purchase of new jewellery as total amount consists of cost of the value of the metal alongwith ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09,125 9,00,578 As per seized document amount mentioned was 19,08,547/- whereas the A.O adopted 28,09,125 a-1/77 (Page No. 36 of PB) - 28,09,125 28,09,125 Repetition of same figure as shown on page No. A-1/78 A-1/22 (Page No. 37 of PB) 34.380 grams return 1,08,269 1,08,269 Return items have been considered while estimating the addition A-1/22 (Page No. 37 of PB) 43.020 grams return 37.130 grams return 1,35,478 1,16,929 1,35,478 1,16,929 Returns items have been considered while estimating the addition. a-1/68 (Page No. 38 of PB) 53,625 53,625+66,702=1,20,327 53,625 Rs. 53,625/- included in the figure of Rs. 66,702/- of the A.O. estimation order 41,24,004 After considering these differences, the value left is only Rs. 66,01,872/-(10724720- (900578+2808547+108269+135478+116929+53625). As per the slips found the value of jewellery was approximately Rs. 66,01,872/-. The assessee had replaced and exchanged the jewellery as is evident from the pages mentioned in the assessment order. Further, the list of items mentioned at page 24,23,69 and 68 (Page No.39 to 41 of PB) are noting but the list of jewellery available with the family members which was prepared to know what jewellery needs to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Page No. 35 of PB) 19,08,547 28,09,125 9,00,578 As per seized document amount mentioned was 19,08,547/- whereas the A.O adopted 28,09,125 a-1/77 (Page No. 36 of PB) - 28,09,125 28,09,125 Repetition of same figure as shown on page No. A-1/78 A-1/22 (Page No. 37 of PB) 34.380 grams return 1,08,269 1,08,269 Return items have been considered while estimating the addition A-1/22 (Page No. 37 of PB) 43.020 grams return 37.130 grams return 1,35,478 1,16,929 1,35,478 1,16,929 Returns items have been considered while estimating the addition. a-1/68 (Page No. 38 of PB) 53,625 53,625+6 6,702=1,20,327 53,625 Rs. 53,625/- included in the figure of Rs. 66,702/- of the A.O. estimation order 41,24,004 81. As the per the Ld. Counsel, after the above reconciliation the value left is only Rs. 66,01,872/- (10,72,4720-900578+2808547+ 135478+116929+53625). Further contended that the Assessee has replaced and exchanged the jewellery and some of the jewelries are belongs to family members. The Assessee has made detailed submissions and contended that the value of total jewllery including diamond found during the search worth at Rs. 63,80,298/-, but the A.O. made addition of Rs. 1,07,24,720/- in the year u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd 66 of PB. 84. Per contra, the Departmental Representative relied on the findings of the Lower Authorities and sought for dismissal of the Ground No. 5 of the Assessee. 85. Heard and perused. During the course of the search, certain pages related to marriage expenses were found and seized. As per the A.O., the said pages reveals that the Assessee took the quotation from management companies for marriage of his daughter for which advance payments were for cheque and cash as well. The said documents were marked as A1/34 and A1/66 which are reproduced as under:- 86. In so far as payment made to photographer i.e. Arjun Colour Lab of Rs. 2,34,000/-, it was contended by the Assessee that the actual payment of Rs. 2,41,000/- was made partly through cheque and partly in cash which has been recorded in the statement of affairs, which can be corroborated from the ledger copy showing the details of the payments to such person which is enclosed at Page No. 45 of the Paper Book. In our opinion, the authorities below committed error in not considering the above materials and made addition. 87. In so far as payment made to FNP Wedding and Events India Pvt. Ltd. amounting to Rs. 3,00,000/-, it w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of third party which has been partly confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) by applying peak credit theory. 91. We have already held in the case of the Assessee for AY 2012- 13 that the addition made on the basis of diary found at the premises of third party cannot be sustained and deleted the addition made by the A.O. Since there is no change of circumstances, by applying the very same findings and conclusions, we allow the Ground No.1 and its sub grounds of the Assessee. 92. Ground No. 2 is regarding the addition of Rs. 29,78,000/- made on account of cash found at the time of search in the premises of the Assessee as unexplained income. 93. During the course of search proceedings in the case of the Assessee, cash of Rs. 29,78,000/- was found. The A.O. made the audition u/s 69A of the Act on the ground that the Assessee failed to explain the source and nature of the cash found. The Ld. CIT(A) while confirming the addition observed that the Assessee claimed that the above cash was received as Sagan from various friends and relatives at the time of marriage of his daughter of Rs. 22,01,400/- and remaining cash was explained as belonging to his father and his wife out of their personal savings, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of search, the assessee had accumulated cash balance of Rs. 22.01.700/- and the balance cash is belonged to the savings of his wife, father who is retired and getting his pension from Military and agricultural income received by him and his family members earned from last 10-15 years. Thus, the source of entire cash found from his possession stands fully explained and therefore, no adverse view may kindly be taken on this count. 97. Further the Assessee had also provided the cash flow statement which is placed at Page No. 166 which is reproduced as under:- KIRAN PAL KHATANA Cash Flow Statement for the year ended on 31-Mar-20 Particulars Amount (Rs.) Opening balance as on 01 April-2019 25,94,401 Add: rental income 3,66,000 Add: Cash withdrawals from bank 2,80,000 Total 32,40,401 Less: Renovation expenses 8,61,668 Closing balance as on 31 March 2020 23,78,733 As per the above cash flow statement and the statement of affairs as on 01/04/2019, the Assessee had cash balance of Rs. 25,94,400/- which has been brought forward in the AY 2020-21 and during the year the Assessee claimed to have made some saving as on the date of search. Thus, the Assessee was having cash balance of Rs. 29, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts A- 1/19b, the figure of Rs. 45,000/- has been mentioned which has been shown as rental income on which service tax @ 15% have been worked at Rs. 6,750/- Napcotation under the name and style PAC Machine Tools India LLP, as per seized documents A- 1/19b, (Page No.46 of PB) the figure of Rs. 77,760/- has been mentioned which has been shown as rental income on which service tax @ 15% have been worked at Rs. 11,664/- Meenakshi as per seized documents A-1/19b, (Page No.77 of PB) the figure of Rs. 18,150/- has been mentioned which has been shown as rental income on which service tax @ 15% have been worked at Rs. 2,722/- who vacated the premises in 2016-17 SCO 141, 21C, Ist Floor, Faridabad and presently rented out in favour of Arshveer Incorporation, Axis as per seized documents A-1/19b, (Page No.57 of PB) the figure of Rs. 1,35,125/- has been mentioned which has been shown as rental income on which service tax @ 15% have been worked at Rs. 20,269/- means Axis bank to whom the assessee has rented out its premises namely SCO 141, 21C, ground Floor, basement Faridabad, Rakesh (658/21) as per seized documents A-1/19b, (Page No.49 of PB) the figure of Rs. 85,000/- has been mentioned which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vestment by applying interest @24% per annum. Further considering the rental agreements placed at Page No. 46 to 80 of Paper Book, computation of income at Page No. 81 to 118 of Paper Book and the computation of income of the wife of the assessee, we find merit in the argument of the Assessee's Representative and hold that the authorities below have committed an error in making the addition. In addition to the same, the identical issue regarding the addition based on the loose sheet has been already discussed in detail and deleted the addition for A.Y 2016-17 in ITA No. 1864/Del/2023 while dealing with Ground No. 2 of the Assessee. By relying on the very same adjudication and the conclusion and applying the said ratio, we delete the above addition made by the A.O. by allowing Ground No. 3 of the Assessee. 104. The Ground No. 4 is regarding the addition of Rs. 45,24,810/- made on account of unexplained investment. 105. During the course of search proceedings, various documents were found containing details of construction expenses incurred by the Assessee during the year under consideration for construction work for residential house (453-454, Sector 9, Faridabad) of Rs. 45,24,8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The copy of the assessment order is also placed at page No. 179 to 187 of the PB. Considering the above facts that the payments have been made through banking channel as well as by way of cash which have been duly reflected in the statement of affairs and looking into the cash flow statement and ledger accounts of building renovation, bank account from which the payment have been made and an amount of Rs. 10,27,405/- have been considered in the case of Sh. Digvijay Singh who was subject to the assessment u/s 153C of the Act, we are of the opinion that the Ld. CIT(A) has committed error in sustaining the addition of Rs. 45,24,810/- on account of unexplained expenditure in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, the Ground No. 4 of the Assessee is allowed. 112. Ground No. 5 of the Assessee is regarding addition of Rs. 1,46,050/- made on account of unexplained expenditure for purchase of foreign currency. 113. The above addition made by the A.O. on the ground that the Assessee has made payment in cash for purchase of foreign currency. The Assessee produced the bank accounts wherein the Assessee made two payments of Rs. 49,270/- and Rs. 96,780/- from bank for purchase of foreign curre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
