TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... However, Shri Bharat Jhunjhunwala, in statement on oath u/s 131 recorded on 12/10/2015, denied having received any cash component from the cosmos group. The assessee has also denied having received cash component in the project. In such a case, the onus would be on revenue to prove the fact of exchange of cash between the Cosmos group and the assessee entity. We find that except for statement of Shri Suraj Parmar, there is no other corroborative evidence on record to substantiate this fact. Name of assessee entity nowhere figures in the seized data and there is no material on record which would suggest that any cash was paid to the assessee out of on-money received by Cosmos Group. The data only mentions abbreviations RJ‟ which is amenable to several interpretations and could not go on to conclusively prove that the same would represent director of the assessee company. Therefore, no concrete belief could be made on the basis of these abbreviations. No additions could be made merely on the basis of presumption, conjectures and surmises. The assessee has all along denied having received any cash component from the cosmos group. In such a situation, the onus was on rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As evident, the sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of certain addition for ₹ 105.97 Lacs. The Ld. AR has not pressed ground nos. 1 2 and therefore, these grounds stand dismissed as being not pressed. 2. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of material on record, our adjudication to the subject matter of appeal would be as given in succeeding paragraphs. Assessment Proceedings 3.1 The material facts of the case are that the assessee being resident corporate assessee is stated to be engaged as builders developer. The case was reopened pursuant to search and seizure action on Cosmos group of cases on 24/09/2014. Accordingly, an assessment was framed on 29/12/2016 wherein the assessee was saddled with impugned additions of ₹ 105.97 Lacs. 3.2 The impugned addition stem from the fact that during search operations on Cosmos group, it transpired that the details of its unaccounted cash transactions were kept by creating a buffer in two duplicate e-mail accounts i.e rbpt2013@gmail.com and rbptthane@yahoo.co.in. No physical copy of such data was maintained. The said e-mails had certain attachment files comprising of tally files/tally ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or was offered to tax. The relevant extract of the statement has been extracted on para 8.1 of the order. The copy of date wise cash receipt as found was provided to the assessee and the same has also been extracted in para 8.3 of the order. 3.4 Accordingly, the assessee‟s case was reopened and notice u/s148 was issued on 25/11/2016 wherein the assessee was show caused as to why the 40% of cash component, which worked out to be ₹ 105.97 Lacs, may not be added to its income as unaccounted cash receipts. The director of the assessee company i.e. Shri Ravi Jhunjhunwala attended the proceedings and filed requisite details but denied having received any cash component from the Cosmos Group on sale transactions. 3.5 The director of assessee entity refuted the allegations of Ld.AO, inter-alia by submitting that there was not even a single piece of evidence which would show that the assessee received any cash from Shri Suraj Parmar or any other person of the cosmos group. The assessee also pointed out various discrepancies in the excel sheet for the submission that the data was not at all reliable and needed to be discarded. Shri Suraj Parmar, in his statement, never made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated by the cosmos group or Shri Suraj Parmar on account of on-money towards sale of shops / flats was distributed among the partners of M/s Cosmos Lifestyle whereas the assessee was not a partner in that entity. The assessee also submitted that addition made on the basis of confessional statement would not be sustainable in law in the absence of cross-examination as well in the absence of any corroborative evidence on record. Reliance was placed on various judicial pronouncements holding the field. 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A), inter-alia, noted that though in the statement Shri Bharat Jhunjhunwala was stated to be the main person of the assessee group, however the cash payments were supposed to have been made to one RJ‟. The assessee has overlooked the fact that RJ‟ stands for Shri Ravi Jhunjhunwala, director of the Assessee Company and not Ranka Jewellers which happens to belong to father-in-law of Shri Suraj Parmar. However, Cosmos group did not have any agreement of revenue sharing with Ranka Jewellers and the agreement was with assessee only. Any word or sentence should not be taken out of context but has to be seen in the whole prospective. In the overall conspectus o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of cash between the Cosmos group and the assessee entity. We find that except for statement of Shri Suraj Parmar, there is no other corroborative evidence on record to substantiate this fact. 6. Another point to be noted is that the name of assessee entity nowhere figures in the seized data and there is no material on record which would suggest that any cash was paid to the assessee out of on-money received by Cosmos Group. The data only mentions abbreviations RJ‟ which is amenable to several interpretations and could not go on to conclusively prove that the same would represent director of the assessee company. Therefore, no concrete belief could be made on the basis of these abbreviations. It is trite law that no additions could be made merely on the basis of presumption, conjectures and surmises. The assessee has all along denied having received any cash component from the cosmos group. In such a situation, the onus was on revenue to prove with corroborative material the fact of exchange of cash between the assessee and the cosmos group. However, except for statement of Shri Suraj Parmar, there is nothing in the armory of Ld. AO to prove this fact. 7. Lastly, it cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
