9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting views on the nexus of the appellant with Shri Sunil Jain / Smt. Seema Jain on whose premises the search was conducted on 04.08.2006." 2. The brief facts of the case are that a search & seizure operation U/s 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 has been carried out on 04.08.2006 at the business cum residential premises of one Shri Sunil Jain alias Tilak Jain and Seema Jain. Since certain documents relating to the appellant have also been found from the searched premises of Shri Jain, proceedings U/s 153C have been initiated by the A.O. by issuance of notice on 20.11.2009. While making said addition, the A.O. has mentioned as under: "On going through the documents impounded at the time of search in Page No. 71 & 72 details of investments by three partners namely Sh. R.S. Gupta having 60% share, S.K. Khanduja Having share 20% and sunil jain 20% share. A total working of 65 lakhs received. Again notice U/s 142(1) was issued on 09/12/2009 along with questionnaire to make compliance on 14/12/2009. As the assesses has not complied with the notice issued U/s 142(1) a summons U/s 131 was issued on 15/12/2009 to attend the assessee personally on 21/12/2009. On 21/12/2009, assessee Sh. Ram Swaro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction and initiation of proceedings u/s. 153C read with section 153A and issue of notice u/s. 143(2) before the ld. CIT(A), but same were dismissed. As regards completion of assessment proceedings u/s. 153C and additions on merits, the ld. CIT(A) allowed both these grounds in favour of the assessee and annulled the assessment as well as deleted both the additions on merits in both the assessment years. His findings in para 4 to 5.2 of the appellate order are reproduced as under : "4. Regarding issuance of notice U/s153C beyond limitation and subsequent completion of assessment proceedings by passing order U/s153A, the submissions of the appellant are found to be acceptable. As per record, search and seizure operation in case of Sunil Jain alias Tilak Jain and Seema Jain has been conducted on 04.08.2006. ACIT, Circle - 2, Gwalior has transferred the seized documents pertaining to the appellant contained in enclosure no. LPS 2/11 to the A.O. vide letter no. ACIT/Circle-2/GWL/08-09/970 dated 12.02.2009 which has been received by the A.O. on 19.02.2009. Subsequently noticed U/s 153C have been issued to the appellant on 20.10.2009 for the assessment year 2001-02 to 2007-08. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p; 25.00 01/09/2001 03 02 Net Total 19 08 C 40.00 40+0 01/04/2001 10 05 D 30.00 40-10 04 03 5.1 On perusal of records it is seen that on receipt of seized documents from ACIT, Circle-2 Gwalior, the A.O. himself does not appear to be sure that the appellant is the person to whom these document pertain. This is evident from his letter dated 23.03.2009 written to ACIT Circle-2 the relevant portion of which is reproduced as under. Subsequently also vide letter dated 30.03.2009, 14.08.2009, 30.09.2009 and 28.10.2009, the A.O. himself is informing the ACIT, Circle-2 and seeking directions from JCIT Range-2 Gwalior regarding issuance of notice u/s 153C to the appropriate person . The satisfaction note prepared by the A.O. vide order sheet entry dated 20.10.2009 also shows that the A.O. is not certain that the document pertain to Shri R.S. Gupta. The satisfaction note is reproduced as under: "Shri R.S. Gupta along with three others have established a college in the name of Vatsal Shiksha Samiti at Gwalior, details of investment by the three partners same Guptaji (may be Shri R.S. Gupta) having 60% share & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs found from the premises of a third party. Adddition of Rs.16,00,000/- for the AY 2001-02 and Rs.23,00,000/- for the AY 2002-03 is deleted." 4. The ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court reported in 296 ITR 619 and of Gujrat High Court reported in 333 ITR 436. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions, we are of the view that both the additions on merit have been rightly deleted by the ld. CIT(A). The AO made the additions on merits on account of investment made by the assessee in Vatsal Shiksha Samiti, Gwalior. It is a fact that no search was conducted in the case of the assessee. Whatever seized material was found was recovered from the business cum residential premises of Shri Sunil Jain and Seema Jain. Nothing was brought on record if both these persons made any adverse statement against the interest of the assessee. No material has been brought on record by the AO to show that the assessee, in fact, made any investment in this Samiti. Whatever investment the assessee has made in the Samiti was duly de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
