TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e A.Ys.2011-12 and 20 12- 12 will be ₹ 1,58,45,600/- and ₹ 33,40,500/-, respectively. Hence, he has directed the Assessing Officer to treat cash receipts of ₹ 5.80 crores and ₹ 1.50 crores, shown in the diary / note book, in F.Ys.2010-l1 and 2011-12, as unaccounted sales and adopt profit from such unaccounted sales, at ₹ 1,58,45,600/- and ₹ 33,40,500/-, respectively, in the A.Ys.2011-12 and 2012- 13. Thus, additions to the extent of ₹ 1,58,45,600/- and ₹ 33,40,500/-, respectively, in the assessments of A.Ys.2011-12 and 20 12-13 are confirmed, in place of unexplained cash credits. The remaining amounts of cash credits assessed in A.Ys.2011-12 and 2012-13 and the total amounts of cash credits assessed in A.Ys.2013-14 to 2015-16 are deleted. The facts remain unchanged. Revenue has failed bring on record any evidence to prove that findings of fact recorded by the ld. CIT(A) is incorrect. Hence, we are inclined to uphold findings of the ld. CIT(A) and reject grounds taken by the Revenue. Unexplained investment u/s 69 - Addition were made based on the retrieved data from CPU found from the assessee premises - HELD THAT:- All unaccou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10th State level conference held in Trichy in the financial 2013-14 - HELD THAT:- We are of the considered view that conference expenses of ₹ 3,00,30,312/- belonged to the DMK party, and the expenses are met by DMK District Secretary Shri KN Nehru. Hence, these expenses cannot be considered as expenses of the assessee, leave alone whether it is explained or unexplained. In addition, there are evidences in the very same retrieved data from CPU, to show that the amount has been received from Shri KN Nehru. Hence, the Assessing Officer is not justified in treating said expenses as unexplained expenses u/s.69C of the Act, in the hands of the assessee company. The CIT(A) after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted addition made by the Assessing Officer towards DMK party expenses u/s 69C of the Act. Hence, we are inclined to uphold findings of the ld. CIT(A) and reject grounds taken by the revenue. Addition u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure towards alleged amount spent for house construction - HELD THAT:- AO was some irrelevant entries which are nowhere connected to the assessee and his office and hence, those entries can only be treated as dumb documents and fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally held that the assessee is having source out of amount received from M/s True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd and which is used for making various payments, including payments made for purchase of Agricultural lands. Facts remain unchanged. The Revenue has failed to bring on record any evidences to prove the findings of fact recorded by the ld. CIT (A) is incorrect or we can take a different view other than view taken by the ld. CIT (A). Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with findings of ld. CIT (A). Accordingly, the ground taken by the revenue is rejected. Estimated notional interest u/s 56 - AO has made addition based on excel sheet as per which the assessee is engaged in money lending business and has advanced loans to various persons - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) has recorded categorical findings that all most all advances claimed to have been given to various persons are accounted in regular books of accounts of M/s Ramjay Trading Company, a proprietorship concern of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has further noted that none of these loans are advanced in the financial year 2015-16, relevant to Asst year 2016-17. He further noted there is no details as to how interest of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y holding that the addition was made on the cash receipts as per contents in diary/notebook and the retrieved data from the computer CPU which was disowned by the assessee and these are not the regular books of accounts maintained by the assessee. In such a case, the provisions of section 68 have no application 1 .2 CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that as per section 68 of the Act, nowhere it is mentioned regular books of accounts. The intention of the legislature to mention as books is to include all the books whether it is regular or irregular: disclosed or undisclosed. 1.3 CIT(A) relying the diary to hold that the cash receipts as reflected in the diary are on account of business transactions/receipts of the assessee when CIT(A) has not considered the diary/notebook and the retrieved data from the computer CPU are the regular books of accounts maintained by the assessee while deleting the addition made u/s68 of the Act which is contradictory in nature. 1.4 The decision of the CIT(A) is contrary to his findings vide para 6.1.36 wherein the CIT(A) held that the entries of cash receipts found in the diary and the note book are to be treated as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regular books of accounts and found that the following transactions (found in the retrieved tally software) were not reflected in the regular books of accounts. Asst. Year: 2012-13: Nature Amount Reference evidence Unexplained cash credits 1,25,00,000 Cash received from True Value Homes P Ltd. Ledger True Value Homes P Ltd in the books of accounts of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd. 4,49,50,000 Cash received from KN Manivannan into SNR Rice Industries P Ltd Ledger KN Manivannan-Capital-in the books of account of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd Unexplained Investments 76,78,250 Payments made for acquiring Agricultural land by KN Manivannan. Ledger-KN Manivannan-Agri Land in the books of account of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd 34,38,675 (cash) 4,00,000 (cheque) Payments made for Land purchase by SNR Rice Industries P Ltd Ledger Land purchase in the books of account of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td Ledger Land purchase in the books of account of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd Total 7,29,87,000 Asst. Year: 2015-16: Nature Amount Reference evidence Unexplained cash credits 25,00,000 Cash received from True Value Homes P Ltd. Ledger True Value Homes P Ltd in the books of accounts of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd. (reflected in loose sheet 77 78) 1,76,63,000 Cash received from KN Nehru (KNN) into SNR Rice Industries P Ltd (including ₹ 25 lakhs in loose sheet numbered 77 78) Ledger KNNI RAVI in the books of accounts of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd 30,00,000 Cash received from KN Manivannan into SNR Rice Industries P Ltd Ledger KN Manivannan-Capital-in the books of account of SNR Rice Industries P Ltd Unexplained Investments 2,25,17,000 (cash) 22,00,000 (cheque) Payments made for acquiring Agricultural land ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourse of survey. 5. The Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings examined the information / contents or discrepancies found in the diary, note book, retrieved data from CPU, loose sheets and required the assessee to explain the same. As the assessee could not explain the transactions properly, the Assessing Officer treated the amounts found as received from different persons, as contained in the said books/documents, as unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the Act and brought to tax. The amounts so brought to tax, u/s.68 of the Act, are as under: Unexplained cash credits u/s.68: A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y.2012-13 A.Y.2013-14 A.Y.2014-15 A.Y.2015-16 Based on an entries in the diary 1. Cash received from X1 5,80,00,000 - - - - 2. Cash received - 6,50,00,000 - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Based on an entries in Note Book - - - - - Based on CPU tally accounts - - - - - 1. Cash paid for Agri Lands (KNM) - 76,78,250 1,84,84,000 2,86,63,000 2,25,17,000 2. Cash paid for land purchase - 35,84,675 54,09,234 4,80,000 51,00,000 3. Difference in the bank ledger - - - - 5,00,000 TOTAL - 1,12,62,925 2,38,93,234 2,91,43,000 2,81,17,000 7. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before, the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed detailed written s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... towards entries found in deleted tally software u/s 68 of the Act. 8. The assessee further submitted that, as regards additions made towards unexplained investments u/s 69 of the Act, first up all deleted entries in tally software cannot give raise to any investment which can be brought to tax u/s 69 of the Act. Further, the accountant who has maintained accounts in tally software entered those receipts from M/s TVH in our books for his reference and finally deleted from our books, when he realised that said money is not belongs to our Company. Further, we had never made any payments for purchase of Agricultural lands in our Company name. Further, in computerised accounts, it is not uncommon to find deleted entries, because while feeding entries to computer, the Accountant may commit some mistakes and to undue such mistakes he may delete entries, But, fact remains that the deleted entries in tally software is really unaccounted income or expenses has to be ascertained before bringing those entries in the tax net. Therefore, based on deleted entries from tally software no addition can be made. Further, assuming but not accepting for a moment, those payment entries relates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd nature of such credit. In this case, the AO has invoked section 68 of the Act, to entries found in dairy, note book and deleted entries of tally software retrieved from CPU without understanding the fact that those seized documents are not books within the meaning of books as defined under the Act. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that entries in dairy and note book are not in the handwriting of the director or his accountant. Further, neither the assessee nor the person who wrote the entries in dairy and note book did confirm that the transactions belong to the assessee. Further, no corroborative evidence has been brought on record to show that the entries represented actual receipts of the assessee. The entries in dairy and note book do not contain any date of receipt of money nor did they show from whom such money was received. The ld. CIT(A) has analysed the transactions recorded in dairy and note book in light of provisions of section 68 of the Act, and observed that those transactions do not fall within the ambit of said section because credit entry is not found in the books of the assessee. He, therefore opined that the AO was erred in making additions towards entries fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eated the notings shown as payments made as unexplained investments and brought to tax u/s.69 of the Act. While, the expenses of DMK conference shown in the loose sheets have been treated as unexplained expenditure u/s,69C of the Act and brought to tax. In this regard, let us examine the relevance of the contents of the diary, note book, loose sheets and the retrieved data from the CPU, vis - vis the applicability of sections 68, 69 and 69C of the Act, etc. 6.1. Unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act: (A.Ys.2011-12 to 2015-16): The first issue is regarding the additions made by way of unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the Act, in all the five assessment years under consideration. The additions made by the Assessing Officer in these assessment years, by way of unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the Act, are: Asst.Yea r Source of information Cash received from Amount (Rs.) 2011-12 Impounded diary Cash received from Xl 5,80,00,000 Impounded Note- - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CPU Total 3,78,00,000 2015-16 Impounded diary - - Impounded Note- - - book - M/s. True Value-Homes 25,00,000 Data retrieved from P Ltd CPU Shri KN Manivannan 30,00,000 Cash received from 1,76,63,000 KNN Total 24,12,55,000 6.1.1 Thus, the additions of unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the Act were made on the above impounded diary, note ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns belonged to the assessee company. 6.1.4 Regarding the entries in the retrieved date from CPU, Shri Ramesh (of the assessee s Auditor s Firm), has stated that as and when cash was received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd, the same was entered by Shri Ramesh Kumar (accountant of the assessee company) into the computer tally software, in the ledger KNN-1 etc. Once the cash received is spent, the entry is deleted at the end of the financial year. These facts are confirmed Shri Ramesh (of the assessee s Auditor s Firm), vide his answer to Q.Nos.5 6 of the statement recorded on 01.02.2018. 6.1.5 Further, there were no corroborative evidences brought on record to show that the contents of the diary, note book, retrieved data from CPU are the actual receipts by the assessee company. Nor there were any statements given by the respective person(s) stating that the contents belonged to the assessee company. Therefore, in the absence of any corroborative evidences and confirmations, it will be difficult to conclude that the assessee had actually received the amounts as noted in the diary, note book, retrieved data from CPU. More so, these are not the regular books of account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatements and filing of returns of income. 6.1.9 Further, perusal of section 68 shows that in relation to the expression books the emphasis is on the word assessee . In other words, such books have to be the books of the assessee himself and not of any other assessee, as held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT [19881 (171 ITR 532) (Punj. Har.). Even the Hon ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Sheraton Apparels v ACIT [2002] (256 ITR 0020((Bom), has held that the term books of account means books of account which have been maintained for determining any source of income. The term source of income , as understood in the Act, is to identify or classify income so as to determine under which head, out of the various heads of income referred to in section 14, it would fall for the purposes of computation of total income for charging income-tax thereon. Thus, the term books of account would mean those books of account whose main object is to provide credible data and information to file the tax returns. Though the judgment was with reference to the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, the meaning of books of account obs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, while enacting the Income Tax Act, was to collect a portion of the income earned by the assessee during the year, as tax for meeting the public purposes/objects. The Act also defined the meaning and scope of income that is to be assessed. The income earned by the assessee falls under five different heads, i.e. (i) salary income, (ii) income from house property, (iii) income from business and profession, (iv) capital gains, and (v) income from other sources. Thus, the income earned by an assessee falls under these heads of income. This is possible only if the assessee declares all incomes earned during the previous year truly and fairly. However, there are several instances where the assessees are either suppressing their incomes (receipts) or inflating the expenses in order to declare lesser incomes and reduce their tax burden. The income so suppressed becomes unaccounted income. The assessees utilize this unaccounted income for acquiring various assets / making investments, meeting various expenses etc; Sometimes, the unaccounted income so generated will be re-introduced into the books by way of loans, advances etc in various names and forms. Therefore, in order to curb t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In addition, there will be several situations, where the business of the assessees require cash availability in order to meet its business commitments like purchases, payment of salaries, creditors etc., forcing the assessees to utilize their unaccounted incomes for business purposes. All these cases result in a situation of excess of assets over liabilities , at that given point of time, if the balance sheet is to be drawn. In order to bridge the gap, the assessees are forced to create matching liabilities on the liabilities side of the balance sheet. For this purpose, the assessees will generally bring their own unaccouated income into the books in the form of loans, advances, etc., in the names of various persons. In this process of bringing the unaccounted income into the books, in the names of various persons, the accounts of the said persons is credited with the said amount. It is a creation of liability in the books, in order to match the total of the assets on the assets side of the balance sheet at the given point of time. These are the unexplained cash credits within the meaning of the provisions of section 68 of the Act. Therefore, any income from undisclosed sources, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uine credits represent the excess of assets over the actual liabilities. 6.1.19 Thus, the pre-requisite for invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act, is the maintenance of regular books of account by the assessee and the credit entries found in such books. In other words, only when some amounts are found credited in the books of accounts of the assessee, the provisions of section 68 gets attracted. Here the books of account means the regular books of accounts maintained by the assessee and based on which the annual financial statements are prepared and returns of income filed. Any other transaction, which is not found as a credit entry in such books, cannot be considered as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. 6.1.20 In the present case, there are regular books of accounts are maintained by the assessee for all the five assessment years under consideration, subjected the same for compulsory auditing u/s.44A3 of the Act, prepared annual financial statements and filed the returns. None of the above amounts, assessed to tax by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act, were found in these books of accounts maintained by the assessee, as credit entries. Henc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012-13 5,00,00,000 Dr 4,50,00,000 - 9,50,00,000 Dr 2013-14 9,50,00,000 Dr 6,75,00,000 - 16,25,00,000 Dr 2014-15 16,25,00,000 Dr 5,10,00,000 - 21,35,00,000 Dr 6.1.23 Therefore, the above amounts of ₹ 5,00,00,000/-, ₹ 4,50,00,000/-, ₹ 6,75,00,000/- and ₹ 5,10,00,000/- received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd during the financial years 2011-12 to 2014-15, form a clear source of funds for any unaccounted investments etc., in the hands of the assessee or its managing director or any other person in the group. Thus, the amounts reflected in the retrieved tally data as the amounts received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd or Shri KN Manivannan or KNM or other members of the group etc., are on account of the above amounts received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd, to the extent of ₹ 21.35 crores. 6.1.24 Further, as could be seen from the assessee s explanation, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s books (ledger: M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd). 5)₹ 1.00 Crore (07.02.2012): Received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd. by ch.no,00452258 (Indian Bank a/c.no.709181550). Reflected in the assessee s Indian Bank (A/c No. 823769016), Tiruchirapalli Cant. on the same date (07.02.20 12). Also reflected in the assessee s books (ledger: M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd). 6) ₹ 50 Lakhs (11.01.2012) (CBE): Reflected in Indian Bank account of Sri Narayana Reddiar Modem Rice Mill - A/c No. 823769209, Tiruchirapalli Cantonment Branch on 11.01.20 12, as deposit. However, the source for the receipt, either in the hands of the assessee company or Sri Narayana Reddiar Modern Rice Mill, was not explained by the assessee. 7) ₹ 1.00 Crore (14.01.2012) (MRK): Assessee is not in a position to furnish any details. 6.1.25 Thus, out of the seven transactions mentioned in the diary, the first transactions are the receipts of the amounts from Shri KN Ravichandran and M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd, and accounted as received from the latter. These amounts were received through banking channels and accounted in the. regular books of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceipt Being RTGS received 50,00,000.0 1-3-2012 By INDIAN BANK 0CC A/C NO: 823769016 Receipt Being RTGS received from True Value Homes Chennai. 2,00,00,000.0 9,15,00,000.0 9,1 5,00,000.00 To Closing Balance 9,15,00,000.00 9,15,00,000.0 6.1.26 Thus, out of the above seven transactions considered by the Assessing Officer as unaccounted / unexplained receipts in A.Y.2012-13, the first five transactions (totaling to ₹ 5.00 crores) are the accounted transactions in the regular books of the assessee and stands explained. This leaves the balance of only ₹ 1.50 crores to be explained by the assessee. In the case of sixth transaction of ₹ 50 lakhs, the assessee claimed that it was the cash deposited into the bank of M/s. Sri Narayana Reddiar Modern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... + ₹ 6,75,00,000) in the F.Ys.2011- 12, 2012-13 and 2013-14, t1ies with the amount of 16.24 crores found in the note book written by Shri Krishnamoorthy. 6.1.29 The above explanation of the assessee appears to be genuine. As could be seen from the copy of note book, there was no date mentioned against receipts of ₹ 16.24 crores shown as from minister . The Assessing Officer in his order, at paragraph 10.2, has accepted this fact, but concluded that the receipts were during the financial year 2012-13, by observing that the dates mentioned in the starting page no.21 was 01.04.2012 and date mentioned in the page 32 was 25.12.2012, and hence the contents of the pages in between pages of 28 31 should be between these two dates. This observation of the Assessing Officer is not correct. Perusal of the copy of the note book shows entries are not only relating to the financial year 2012-13, but also other years. Various dates of the transactions found in the note book are as under: Page no.(of note book) Dates mentioned 21 01.04.2012 to 01.08.20 12 23 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be correct and needs to be accepted, especially in the absence of any contrary evidences / information available on record. 6.1.32 Similarly, the other cash receipts shown in the retrieved data from computer CPU, etc., shown as cash receipts from the group persons are to be treated as the amount drawn from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd. These amounts include the amounts shown as (i) cash received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd, (ii) cash received from KN Manivannan, (iii) cash received from Janani Minerals, (iv) cash received from KN Nehru / KNN etc., in various financial years. The details are: Cash receipts A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y.2012- 13 A.Y.2013- 14 A.Y.2014- 15 A.Y.2015- 16 Based on CPU tally accounts 1. Cash recd. from True- Value-Home - 1,25,00,000 1,10,00,000 - 25,00,000 2. Cash recd. from KN Manivannan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mes P Ltd, and reflected as loans/advances in its books, alone are considered as the source of funds for the assessee s investments / expenditure, if any. 6.1.36 At the same time the amounts mentioned as cash receipts in these diary, note book, retrieved computer data etc., cannot be ignored. It may be true some of the amounts received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd were entered at multiple places, i.e. in the diary, note book and also in the computer CPU. It may also be true that the diary and note book were in the hand writing of the One Mr. Krishnamoorthy and the assessee disowned the contents. But it is an admitted fact that Shri Krishnamoorthy has been assigned some work by the assessee group and, in fact, Shri Krishnamoorthy himself has admitted that he was supervising the business activities of the assessee company and M/s. Shri Narayana Reddiar Modern Rice Mill (vide answers to Q.Nos.3 5 of his statement dated 31.01.2018). Therefore, the entries of cash receipts found in the diary and the note book are to be treated as the transactions of the assessee company, since they were found in the business premises of the assessee. 6.1.37 However, as detailed i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 1.50 crores is to be treated as the unaccounted sales of the year. This could be the only the possible interpretation for the entries found in the diary / note book maintained a person who is supposed to me managing the rice mill business affairs of the assessee. 6.1.41 The entire sale proceeds of the unaccounted sales cannot constitute the net profit of the assessee. Even unaccounted sales will have corresponding purchases. Also in the present case, the quantitative details of purchases, sales and stock of paddy/rice are maintained by the assessee, there are no discrepancies found in such quantitative details. Hence it is not possible to presume that the unaccounted sales are made from the accounted purchases. In other words, the unaccounted sales, in the present case, are from unaccounted purchases only. In such a case, the fair way is to estimate and determine the possible income from such unaccounted sales, is by adopting the gross profit ratio. The gross profit ratios of the assessee accounted business of the rice mill are as under: Particulars F.Y. 2010-11 F.Y.2011-12 Tota ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act, are: Source of information Investments made in the form of Amount (Rs.) A.Y. 2012-13 Impounded diary Impounded Note-book Data retrieved from CPU - - Cash paid to KNM for purchase of agril.land Cash paid for land purchase - - 76,78,250 35,84,675 Total 1,12,62,925 A.Y.2013-14 Impounded diary Impounded Note-book Data retrieved from CPU - - Cash paid to KNM for purchase of agril.land Cash paid for land purchase - -1,84,84,000 54,09,234 Total 2,38,93,234 A.Y. 2014-15 Impounded diary Impounded Note-book Data retrieved from CPU - - Cash paid to KNM for purchase of agril.land Cash paid for land purchase - - 2,86,63,000 4,80,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of such financial year. 6.2.4 Therefore, the assessee is required to explain the nature and source for these investments. When this fact was brought to the notice of the assessee, the assessee s representative before the undersigned submitted that the company has not made any such investments. The assessee s representative also stated that there were cash receipts of to the tune of ₹ 21.35 crore,s received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd., through Shri KN Manivannan, the company s managing director, which in-turn, was used for various purposes in the hands of the various persons of the group. Hence the assessee claimed that the above investments, in the form of (i) cash paid to Shri KNM for purchase of agricultural lands, and (ii) cash paid for lands, if at all to be considered as actual investments, should be considered as the investments made out of the above amount of ₹ 21.35 crores received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd. 6.2.5 The above explanation seems to be reasonable. As detailed in the foregoing paragraphs, there were cash receipts to the tune of ₹ 21.35 crores from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd. The amounts are clearly shown in the audited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... investments, expenditure in A.Y.2011-12 0 2. Additional Income brought to tax, by estimating income, by treating cash receipts as unaccounted sales 1,58,45,600 Closing 31.3.2011 Balance as on 1,58,45,600 Total 1,58,45,600 Total 1,58,45,600 A.Y. 2012-13 1. Opening 1.4.2011 Balance as on 1,58,45,600 1. Cash paid to KNM for purchase of agril.land 76,78,250 2. Additional Income brought to tax, by estimating income, by treating cash receipts as unaccounted sales 33,40,500 2.. Cash purchase paid for land 35,84,675 3. Cash received from M/s. True Vale Homes P Ltd 5,00,00,000 Closin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d for land 51,00,000 Closing 31.3.2015 Balance as on 14,07,69,941 Total 16,83,86,941 Total 16,83,86,941 6.2.7 Thus, from the above cash flow, it is clear that all the unaccounted investments etc., made by the group, in various financial years, are within the limits of funds received from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd in the respective years. In other words, there are no unexplained investments in the hands of the assessee in any of the assessment years under consideration. Instead, there is excess of funds (sources) over the investments etc., as on 31.03.2015, to the tune of ₹ 14,07,69,941/-, in the hands of the assessee or its managing director or the group. 6.2.8 Therefore, in the absence of any contrary evidences, the above investments of payments for purchase of agricultural lands and other lands, during the financial years 2011-12 to 2014-15 (A.Ys.2012-13 to 2015-16), are deemed to have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... diture on account of DMK 10th State level conference held in Trichy in 2013-14. Perusal of the impounded documents (loose sheets) clearly shows that the expenses are in relation to the conducting of DMK 10th State level conference only. There are no disputes in this regard. It is also a fact that Shri KN Nehru, who was the District Secretary of DMK for Trichy district, is one of the brothers of the Managing Director of the assessee company. Therefore, Shri KN Nehru, being the District Secretary of the party, is required to make arrangements for the conference. Further, since Shri Nehru is the brother of the assessee company s managing director, Shri Nehru and his party workers using the company s premises to chalk-out the strategies and logistics for the conference is quite natural and cannot be ruled out. In such a case, the assessee s claim that the above expenditure of ₹ 3,00,30,312/- relates to DMK 10th State conference, is to be considered as genuine. 6.3.1 The next thing to be seen is regarding the person who has spent the amount and the sources for the said expenditure. The asses see company is running a rice mill. There is no need for the assessee company f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e purpose of conference and expended for the conference locally, the details of the conference collections and its expenses were squared up locally and hence the same are not reflected in the DMK party state head office, has some merits and needs to be given credit. 6.3.4 Thus, from the above facts, it is clear that - (i) the expenses belonged to the DMK Conference s expenses, (ii) Shri KN Nehru, being the District Secretary, has confirmed that the expenses were borne by the party, (iii) data retrieved from CPU, also showed cash receipts from Shri KN Nehru to the tune of ₹ 3,78,00,000/- during the same financial year 2013- 14. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the above conference expenses of Rs,3,00,30,312/- belonged to the DMK party, and the expenses are met by DMK District Secretary Shri KN Nehru. Hence these expenses cannot be considered as the assessee s expenses, leave alone whether it is explained or unexplained. In addition, there are evidences in the very same retrieved data from CPU, to show that the amount has been received from Shri KN Nehru. Hence the Assessing Officer is not justified in treating the said expenses as unexplained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vernment) and later the same has been deleted from computer. The said transactions were further recorded in notebook by Shri V.Krishnamurthy. Therefore, there is a clear nexus between retrieved data from computer CPU and entries recorded in notebook and hence, the assessee cannot claim that entries recorded in diary and notebook does not belong to his business affairs. The ld. DR further submitted that books of accounts including diary and notebook were found in the business premises of the assessee and as per provisions of section 292C of the Act, presumption is always on the assessee that said books of accounts which belongs to the person from whose custody said books of accounts were found and further, entries recorded in said books of accounts are true and correct unless the assessee rebuts the presumption. In this case, although the assessee disowned diary and notebook and contents recorded therein, but the AO had brought out clear facts to link said entries to books of accounts of the assessee and hence, ld.CIT(A) was completely erred in deleting additions made by the AO towards entries recorded in seized diary and notebook and retrieved data of computer CPU u/s.68 of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... because for the purpose of section 68 of the Act, the AO has considered diary, notebook and deleted entries from computer CPU data as books of accounts, whereas the same diary, notebook and deleted entries of CPU data was not considered as books for the purpose of section 69 of the Act. The AO s stand is inconsistent as both the provisions of section 68 and 69 do not operate simultaneously on the same material. The ld.AR for the assessee further referring to the provisions of section 68 of the Act, submitted that in order to invoke said provision, certain conditions to be fulfilled as per which any sum is found credited in the books of assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year. The word credited does not mean every entry made anywhere in whatever manner. To treat a particular credit within the ambit of section 68 of the Act, the said entry should be on credit side of an account and further said amount has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained by the assessee and entries contained in said books of accounts are business transactions of the assessee. The ld.AR for the assessee further referring to paper-book filed for this purpose submitted that if you see the documents found during the course of survey, including impugned diary, those documents are maintained by some third person, where various transactions were recorded including disclosed transactions of the assessee and said transactions does not show whether entries represents credits or debits. Further, name of persons connected to entries are not found. Entries found in the notebook do not contain any date. There are no details about transactions. Therefore, said diary and notebook do not constitute books as contemplated u/s.68 of the Act, and further, on that basis no addition could be made u/s.68 of the Act. In this regard, he has relied upon plethora of judicial precedents including decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT (2002) 256 ITR 20. The case laws relied upon by the assessee is reproduced as under:- a) Amitabh Bansal v. ITO (2019) 175 lTD 401 (ITAT, Delhi) b) Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT (P H) c) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd by relying upon statement of Shri S. Ramesh without appreciating the fact that Shri S. Ramesh was not an Accountant of assessee company but was an Assistant of Chartered Accountant and he do not aware of the facts of the assessee business transactions. The ld.AR further submitted that the ld.CIT(A) after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted additions made by the AO u/s.68 of the Act, by holding that diary, notebook and deleted accounts in CPU are not books of accounts and AO did not bring any corroborative evidences to show that transactions represents undisclosed income of the assessee. 17. The ld.AR further submitted that the AO has made additions towards payments made for acquisition of agricultural lands u/s.69 of the Act, as unexplained investment on the basis of entries recorded in loose papers, deleted data of computer CPU without appreciating the fact that deleted entries found in computer CPU and loose papers did not create any asset. He, further, submitted that other than entries, the AO did not gather any evidence to corroborate that the assessee has made investments as alleged. The AO did not make any enquiry nor brought any evidence on record to sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. During the course of survey, certain material including diary, notebook and computer CPU was found and seized. As per seized documents, diary was maintained by one Shri V. Krishnamurthy, who claims to have worked as Manager for Assessee Company. The computer CPU was examined and data from computer CPU was retrieved as per which certain entries were recorded and deleted. The retrieved data from computer CPU indicate that the assessee has received some amounts from one Minister. During the course of survey, a statement was recorded from Shri K.N. Manivannan, the Managing Director of assessee company, Shri V. Krishnamurthy, claims to be the Manager of Assessee Company and Shri Ramesh, claims to be Accountant of assessee company. During the course of survey, in the sworn statement recorded Shri K.N. Manivannan, Managing Director disowned diary and its contents. He, further stated that said diary was maintained by Shri V. Krishnamurthy and he may explain the purpose and contents recorded in said diary. As regards, notebook and its contents, once again he disowned said notebook and stated that Shri V. Krishnamurthy was recording entries in notebook and he may be able to explain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 68 of the Act, it is clear that credit must be found in the books of the assessee maintained for any previous year. In the present case, what has been considered by the AO is diary, notebook and retrieved deleted entries of computer CPU. Therefore, whether those diary, notebook and retrieved data of computer CPU can be considered as books of accounts in order to invoke section 68 of the Act or not has to be seen. 21. The Income Tax Act, 1961 has defined books and books of accounts u/s.2(12A) of the Act, as per which books and books of accounts includes, ledgers, day-books, cash books, account books and other books, whether kept in the written form or as printouts of data stored in a floppy, disk, tape or any other form of electro-magnetic data storage device. Therefore when books of accounts are clearly defined under the Act, then diary, notebook and retrieved data of computer CPU can be considered as books of accounts or not is a question that needs to be considered. From the definition of books or books of accounts , it is abundantly clear that books of accounts means regular books of accounts maintained by the assessee for any previous year to record day to d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooks of account whose main object is to provide credible data and information to file the tax returns. Though the judgment was with reference to the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, the meaning of books of account observed by the Hon ble court is with reference to the general and accounting principles and hence applicable for all provisions of the Act. Similarly, Delhi Tribunal, in the case of Amitabh Bansal v. ITO (2019)(175 ITD 401) (Deihi- Trib.), has held that Invocation of section 68 sans valid and proper books of account of assessee is invalid . The tribunal also observed that a mere credit in bank account simply or any other raw information available to Assessing Officer cannot be loosely called as books of account under section 68 of the Act. 22. In this case, the AO has considered diary, notebook and deleted entries of computer CPU as books of accounts maintained by the assessee for any previous year to treat said entries as unexplained cash credits within the meaning of section 68 of the Act, without bringing any evidence on record to prove that said books of accounts are maintained by the assessee and entries contained in said books of accounts are busin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are confirmed by Shri Ramesh in the statement recorded on 01.02.2018. Therefore, when the person who entered the entries in computer software had clarified that said entries are not belongs to business affairs of the assessee and further, he had also categorically explained nature and source of such entries and the reason for deletion of entries in the computer software, then deleted entries cannot be considered as unexplained cash credit of the assessee to bring those entries within the ambit of section 68 of the Act. No doubt, it is for the assessee to explain each and every entry recorded in its books of accounts to the satisfaction of the AO. But, once the assessee has offered his explanation, then it is for the AO to bring on record some other corroborative evidences to show that the contents of the diary, notebook and retrieved data from CPU are actually receipts of the assessee company. In this case, although the assessee has disowned the diary, notebook and contents recorded therein and which was further strengthened by the statements of the persons who maintained the diary, notebook, but the AO has disregarded all the evidences and brought those entries within the ambit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sidered by the AO from computer CPU and find that above explanation of the assessee appears to be correct. In fact, as could be seen from the audited financials of M/s. True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., for the relevant financial years, there were payments (advances) to the assessee company to the tune of ₹ 21.35 crores and said payments are reflected under loans and advances in the balance sheet of M/s. TVH. The assessee has filed ledger extract of M/s. SNR Rice Industries KNM in the books of M/s. True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd. We have gone through said ledger extract and find that the assessee has received a sum of ₹ 5 crores in financial year 2011-12 and further a sum of ₹ 4.5 crores in financial year 2012-13. Similarly, a sum of ₹ 6.75 crores and ₹ 5.10 crores was received in the financial year 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. The assessee has further explained that deleted entries from computer CPU was exactly tallied with ledger account of M/s. SNR Rice Industries. Further, as could be seen from the explanation offered by the assessee, most of cash receipts of ₹ 6.5 crores found in the diary as cash receipt during financial year 2011-12 are acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceipts considered by the AO on the basis of notebook. The AO has considered entries recorded in notebook on pages 28 to 31 as unexplained cash credits of the assessee on the ground that said entries was recorded in the name of Ex-Minister, but the assessee could not explain the nature and source of such credits. We find that in the notebook in pages 28 to 31, a sum of ₹ 16.24 crores shown as money from minister. The assessee explained that said notebook was written by third person and hence, he was not aware of the noting in the notebook. The assessee further claimed that noting in pages 28 to 31 did not contain any dates and hence, it cannot be attributed to any financial years. Thirdly, it was further claimed that these cash receipts recorded in diary may be the same amounts, which were received from M/s. True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., in the financial year 2012-13 2013-14 amounting to ₹ 16.25 crores. We have gone through explanation given by the assessee in light of the findings recorded by the ld.CIT(A) and found that above explanation of the assessee appears to be correct, because notebook considered by the AO is neither maintained by the assessee nor it shows any d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s shown in retrieved data of the computer shown as cash receipts from the group persons are considered as amount drawn from M/s. True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd. These amounts include cash received from M/s. True Value Homes Pvt Ltd, cash received from Shri K.N. Manivannan and cash received from M/s. Janani Minerals. A careful analysis of the above, show that most of the amounts drawn from M/s. True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., were not entered in computer CPU directly as such. Further, entries found in retrieved data from the CPU are incomplete and not depicts any particular nature of credits and further name from whom such credits were received. Therefore, based on some entries recorded in computer and later deleted for some purpose or for no reasons, the same cannot be considered as some cash receipts which are not disclosed in the regular books of accounts, unless the AO brought on record some evidences to show that said cash receipt was received from particular source and for particular purpose. Further, in any case as discussed in the preceding paragraph, the purported cash receipt shown in diary, notebook and deleted CPU cannot be treated as unexplained cash credits, which can be t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee disowned the contents of the diary, note book and the retrieved data from the computer CPU. In such a case, the provisions of section 68 have no application. The only alternative possibility is that the entries could be of the second category, i.e. business receipts, especially in the absence of any other explanations offered by the assessee, or the corroborative evidences available on record. Again the business receipts could be either revenue receipts or capital receipts. In the present case, there are no evidences to show that there were any capital asset transactions. Hence, the cash receipts reflected in the diary and note book cannot be presumed as capital receipts. Therefore, the only possibility could be that these cash receipts are on account of business transactions, and can constitute business receipts of the assessee company. As could be seen from the records, the assessee is running a rice mill. Therefore, in absence of any explanation, the above cash receipts of ₹ 5.80 crores during the financial year 2010-11, found in the diary can be treated as unaccounted sales of the year. However, in the case of cash receipts of ₹ 6.5 crores during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 are deleted. The facts remain unchanged. The Revenue has failed bring on record any evidence to prove that findings of fact recorded by the ld. CIT(A) is incorrect. Hence, we are inclined to uphold findings of the ld. CIT(A) and reject grounds taken by the Revenue. 30. The next issue that came up for our consideration is addition towards unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Asst. years 2012-13 to 2015-16. The additions made by the Assessing Officer in these assessment years, by way of unexplained investments u/s.69 of the Act, are as under: Source of information Investments made in the form of Amount (Rs.) A.Y. 2012-13 Impounded diary Impounded Note-book Data retrieved from CPU - - Cash paid to KNM for purchase of agril.land Cash paid for land purchase - - 76,78,250 35,84,675 Total 1,12,62,925 A.Y.2013-14 Impounded diary Impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , such investments becomes the deemed income of the assessee. Therefore, the assessee is required to explain the nature and source for these investments. Admittedly, impugned note book entries refer to certain payments made for purchase of agricultural lands. The assessee explained that there were cash receipts to the tune of ₹ 21.35 crores from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd., through Shri. KN Manivannan, the company managing director, which in-turn, was used for various purposes including payment for purchase of Agricultural land in the name of various persons of the group. Therefore, the assessee claimed that the above investments, in the form of (i) cash paid to Shri KNM for purchase of agricultural lands, and (ii) cash paid for lands, if at all to be considered as actual investments, then the same should be considered as the investments made out of the above amount of ₹ 21.35 crores received from M/s. True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd. 33. Having heard both sides, we find that above explanation seems to be reasonable. As detailed in the foregoing paragraphs, there were cash receipts to the tune of ₹ 21.35 crores from M/s. True Value Homes P Ltd. The amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tional Income brought to tax, by estimating income, by treating cash receipts as unaccounted sales 33,40,500 2.. Cash paid for land purchase 35,84,675 3. Cash received from M/s. True Vale Homes P Ltd 5,00,00,000 Closing Balance as on 31.3.2012 5,79,23,175 Total 6,91,86,100 Total 6,91,86,100 A.Y. 2013-14 1. Opening Balance as on 1.4.2012 5,76,23,175 1. Cash paid to KNM for purchase of agril.land 1,84,84,000 2. Cash received from M/s. True Vale Homes P Ltd 4,50,00,000 2.. Cash paid for land purchase 54,09,234 Closing Balance as on 31.3.2013 7,90,29,941 Total 10,29,23,175 Total 10,29,23,175 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omes P Ltd. Consequently, source for above payments for agricultural lands have been explained out of known source and hence, addition made towards payments for purchase of agricultural lands and other lands, as unexplained investments u/s.69 of the Act, in the assessments of A.Ys.2012-13 to 2015-16, cannot be sustained under law. The facts remain unchanged. The Revenue has failed bring on record any evidence to prove that findings of fact recorded by the ld. CIT(A) is incorrect. Hence, we are inclined to uphold findings of the ld. CIT(A) and reject grounds taken by the Revenue. 35. The next addition of unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act, is towards difference in the bank ledger, of ₹ 5,00,000/-, in the assessment of A.Y.2015-16 for purchase of lands. The facts with regard to impugned addition is that during the financial year 2014-15 (A.Y.2015-16), the company has made investments (amounts paid for purchase of lands) of ₹ 38,50,000/- (₹ 22,00,000+ ₹ 16,50,000) through cheques. However the Assessing Officer in his order observed that the amounts paid through cheques was only ₹ 33,50,000/- and hence, balance amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the conference of a political party. Nor the assessee is into the business of organizing any such activities of conducting the conferences, meetings etc. Therefore, it is not possible to presume that expenses belonged to the assessee company. On the other hand, Shri KN Nehru, vide his letter dated 20.12.2018 before the Assessing Officer, had clearly stated that above expenditure of ₹ 3,00,30,312/- was borne by the DMK party and the sources for the said payment was collections from the party workers who attended the meeting. Therefore, in the absence of any contrary evidences, and since the expenses are for the DMK s state level conference and the assessee company is not in any obligation of meeting such expenditure, it is not possible to arrive at a conclusion that the expenses are borne by the assessee company. It may be true that the data retrieved from the computer CPU, in the books of M/s. Narayana Reddiyar Modern Rice Mill, showed details of above payments as DMK conference expenses in the ledger copy of KNN- 1. But as mentioned earlier, the company accountant entered all the transactions in the computer tally software, whether belonged to the assessee company, or to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t facts has rightly deleted addition made by the Assessing Officer towards DMK party expenses u/s 69C of the Act. Hence, we are inclined to uphold findings of the ld. CIT(A) and reject grounds taken by the revenue. 39. In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst. year s 2011-12 to 2015-16 are dismissed. ITA.NO. 2406/CHNY/2019 - AY 2016-17-KN MANIVANNAN 40. The facts and issues involved in this appeal filed by the revenue are almost similar and identical to the facts and issues, which we have considered in the case of M/s GSNR Rice Industries Private Limited in ITA No.s 2407 to 2411/Chny/2019 for Asst. years 2011-12 to 2015-16. The sole basis for various addition made by the AO towards unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act, unexplained investments u/s 69 of the Act, and unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act, is documents found during the course of survey u/s 133A, including dairy, note book and retrieved data from computer CPU. We have considered an identical issue in the case of M/s GSNR Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd and held that dairy, note book and retrieved data from computer CPU are not books or books of accounts as defined u/s 2(12A) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CPU to make addition u/s 69C of the Act. As per retrieved data, one cash payment of ₹ 49,00,181/- from KN Manivanna to Shri. KN Nehru was considered as unexplained expenditure. Similarly, a sum of ₹ 77,18,431/- cash payment made for house construction/work of Shri. KN Nehru has been considered as unexplained expenditure. Both entries are retrieved from computer CPU. According to the AO, above two payments were made from the account of M/s Narayana Reddiyar Modern Rice Mill to KN Nehru for house construction/work. The assessee has disowned deleted data from computer software. The assessee further claimed that he has not made any such payments to Shri. KN Nehru for house construction. 43. Having heard both parties and considered materials on record, we find that except retrieved deleted entries, the AO has not brought on record any corroborative evidence to prove that said transaction had been taken place between the parties. Further, impugned entries were retrieved from the tally software books of accounts of M/s GSNR Rice industries Pvt. Ltd and those books are nothing to do with assessee and M/s Narayana Reddiyar Modern Rice Mill. Further, both parties denied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd cannot be ignored. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is enough source to explain said payment and hence, said payment cannot be considered as unexplained expenditure which can be brought to tax u/s 69C of the Act. Facts remain unchanged. The Revenue has failed to bring on record any evidences to prove the findings of fact recorded by the ld. CIT(A) is incorrect or we can take a different view other than the view taken by the ld. CIT(A). Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with findings of ld. CIT(A). Hence, we reject grounds taken by the Revenue. 44. Insofar as addition of ₹ 4,73,00,500/- u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, once again above addition is based on three deleted entries from computer CPU. The AO had retrieved deleted entries from computer CPU as per which certain payments were made for purchase of agricultural lands by KN Manivannan and debited into land purchase account in the books of SNR Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd. According to the AO, the assessee has made certain payments for purchase of land, but could not explain the entries and source for said investment. Hence, he has treated those delet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther, in order to bring any Investments within the ambit of section 69 of the Act, there must be some investments which were not recorded in the books of accounts of the assessee and further, the assessee fails to explain source for such expenditure. In this case, what was considered by the AO was some irrelevant entries which are nowhere connected to the assessee and his office and hence, those entries can only be treated as dumb documents and from those documents, no additions can be made u/s.69 of the Act. We, further noted that the ld. CIT(A) has also recorded a categorical findings that the assessee is having sufficient source to explain cash payments. In case, the retrieved entries from CPU are considered to be true, then availability of source out of amount received from M/s True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd cannot be ignored. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is enough source to explain said payment and hence, said payment cannot be considered as unexplained investments which can be brought to tax u/s 69 of the Act. We further noted that the ld. CIT(A) after considering cash flow statement filed by the assessee, very categorically held that the assessee is h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,04,25, 912/-. Facts remain unchanged. The Revenue has failed to bring on record any evidences to prove the findings of fact recorded by the ld. CIT(A) is incorrect or we can take a different view other than the view taken by the ld. CIT(A). Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with findings of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the ground taken by the revenue is rejected. 48. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for Asst. year 2016-17 is dismissed. ITA No. 2825/Chny/2019 AY 2016-17 - K.N. NEHRU 49. The facts and issues involved in this appeal filed by the revenue are almost similar and identical to the facts and issues, which we have considered in the case of M/s GSNR Rice Industries Private Limited in ITA Nos 2407 to 2411/Chny/2019 for Asst. years 2011-12 to 2015-16. The sole basis for addition made by the AO towards unexplained money u/s 69A and unexplained investments u/s 69A of the Act, is documents found during the course of survey u/s 133A, including dairy, note book and retrieved data from computer CPU. We have considered an identical issue in the case of M/s GSNR Rice Industries Pvt. Ltd and held that dairy, note book and retrieved data from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t this issue has been dealt by us in the case of Shri. KN Manivannan for Asst. year 2016-17 and held that the AO was erred in making addition towards unexplained expenditure u/s 69C, on the basis of retrieved data from computer CPU. The same addition is once again made in the hands of the assessee u/s 69A, which is clearly a double addition not permissible under law. Therefore, on this count addition made by the AO is unsustainable. Further, in the case of Shri. KN Manivanna, we held that the assessee has explained source for expenditure which is out of amount received from M/s True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd and hence, no addition could be made u/s 69C of the Act. The reason given by us in preceding paragraph no 43 shall mutatis mutandis apply to this appeal, as well. Therefore, for similar reasons, we are of the considered view that assuming but not accepting, if deleted entries are considered to be true, then availability of source in form of amount received from M/s True Value Homes Pvt. Ltd is also needs to accepted as genuine. Further, once source is explained, then no addition could be made u/s 69A of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, when the person who entered the entries in computer software had clarified that said entries are not belongs to business affairs of the assessee and further, he had also categorically explained nature and source of such entries and the reason for deletion of entries in the computer software, then deleted entries cannot be considered as unexplained investments to bring those entries within the ambit of section 69 of the Act. No doubt, it is for the assessee to explain each and every entry recorded in its books of accounts to the satisfaction of the AO. But, once the assessee has offered his explanation, then it is for the AO to bring on record some corroborative evidences to show that retrieved data from CPU are actual investments of the assessee. In this case, although the assessee has disowned deleted entries from tally software and which was further strengthened by the statements of the persons who maintained the tally software, but the AO has disregarded all evidences and brought those entries within the ambit of section 69 of the Act, without bringing on record any other evidences to prove that said entries are in fact taken place. Further, in order to bring any I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
