9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d DR") and on the basis of material available on record. 3. Since all the appeals pertain to the same assessee and issues involved are, inter-alia, also common, therefore, these appeals were heard together as a matter of convenience and are being adjudicated by way of this consolidated order. Further, as the basic facts in all the appeals are same, except with variance in figures, we have elaborately mentioned only the facts for the first assessment year (i.e. 2003-04) before us, for the sake of brevity. However, if any particular issue is arising in other assessment year for the first time, the facts pertaining to the same are discussed accordingly. ITA no.680/Mum./2020 Assessment Year : 2003-04 4. In its appeal for assessment year 2003-04, the assessee has raised following grounds:- "1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts while rejecting Appellant's ground challenging validity of proceedings initiated by A.O. u/s 153A of the Act. 2.1 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO.1 The learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as facts while not appreciating that the so called reasons recorded in Alleged Satisfaction Note dt. 04.08.2008 were vague and did not satisfy the we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "8.0 I have perused the facts of the case, the arguments in support of the additional ground of appeal, the remand reports of the AO and the counter arguments of the appellant on the remand report, in deciding the additional grounds of appeal The additional grounds of appeal are common for the A.YS 2002-03 to 2008-07 and are disposed together. The first issue which needs examination is the objection by the appellant that no requisition was made u/s 132A in the name of the appellant but the assessment was evidently concluded by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act and therefore the proceedings are vitiated in law. In this regard, it is seen from the remand report submitted by the AD dated 10/02/2017 wherein a copy of Satisfaction Note for issue of Notice u/s 153A r.w.s. 153C of the Act in the case of the appellant for AY 2002-03 to 2008-07 have been enclosed. The reasons for issue of Notice u/s 163A wa 163C as recorded by the AO is reproduced an under: .......... From the above reasons recorded by the AO, It is very much evident that satisfaction has been recorded by the AO u/s 153C of the Act. In any case, even in cases where proceedings are initiated u/s 153C, Notices a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 139 for the AYS 2002 03 and 2003-04 and the ROI filed for AY 2004-05 is nonest in law as the same has been filed beyond the permissible date u/s 139(6) of the Act. Also, the ROIs for A Ys 2005-06 & 2008-07 are filed only after the requisition u/s 132A (20/09/2006). The returned incomes and the date of ROIs for all the years in appeal are detailed in Table 1. A perusal of the ROIs filed by the appellant for AY 2003-04 to 2007-08 u/s 153A showed that the appellant has claimed income from agriculture in all these years. The appellant also showed agricultural income for AY 2005-06 to 2007-08 in the ROI filed u/s 139. The details of agricultural income shown by the appellant in the regular ROIs u/s 139 and ROIs filed u/s 153A and the addition made on this account are as under: Table 5: Details of agricultural income shown and additions thereon A.Y. 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Filed u/s 139 No ROI No ROI Rs.3,98,677 Rs.2,35,304 Rs.3,11,260 Filed u/s 153A Rs.2,93,815 Rs.4,58,061 Rs.3,98,677 Rs.2,35,304 Rs.3,11,260 Addition (Rs.) Rs.2,93,815 Rs.4,58,061 Rs.3,98,677 Rs.2,35,304 Rs.3,11,260 11.1. As may be seen from the facts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve power to undo what has been concluded by the High Court Any interpretation which leads to such conclusion has to be repelled and/or avoided Consequently, it is held that it is not open for the assessee to seek deduction or clair expenditure which has not been claimed in the original assessment, which assessment already stands completed, only because an assessment under s 153A in pursuance of search or requisition is required to be made-Suncity Alloys (P) Ltd vs. Asstt. CIT (2009) 124 TTJ (Jd) 674 (2009) 27 DTR (Jd) 139 affirmed. CIT vs. Smt Shalla Agarwal (2012) 246 CTR (All) 266 (2012) 65 DTR (All) 41 (2012) 346 ITR 130 (All) relied on; K.P. Varghese vs ITO (1981) 24 CTR (SC) 358: (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) applied." (Paras 30, 34 & 35) In a decision in the case of M/s D J Malpani (ITA No 1148-1154/Pn/2013 decision dated 30/10/2015), the Pune ITAT on the issue of fresh claim made in the returns filed u/s 153A held as under: "The La Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the issue stands decided against the assessee by the decision of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of B.G. Shirke Construction Technology Pvt. Va. ACIT vide ITA Nos 727 to 730/PN/2012 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rities. 9. We have heard the learned D.R. and perused the material available on record. We find that in the impugned order, the learned CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and findings of the Assessing Officer has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee both on jurisdiction as well as on merits of the case. In the absence of any contradictory material being available on record, we are of the considered view that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) requires no interference and, therefore, is upheld. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal for assessment year 2003-04 are dismissed. 10. In the result, appeal by the assessee for assessment year 2003-04 is dismissed. ITA no.681/Mum./2020 Assessment Year : 2004-05 11. In this appeal, the assessee has raised similar grounds as in its appeal for assessment year 2003-04 and the same are also dismissed in view of our findings given at Para-9 above. 12. In the result, appeal by the assessee for assessment year 2004-05 is dismissed. ITA no.682/Mum./2020 Assessment Year : 2007-08 13. In this appeal, the sole grievance of the assessee is against addition of Rs.26 lakhs, made under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Maniyar S.B. (2,50,000) - Affidavit of both creditors is filed May to June 2006 7,00,000 Ram Pratap Sahani (3,00,000), Eknath Kapshe (4,00,000) - Affidavits of both creditors filed July 2006 5,00,000 Siddiqui G. Dastagir (5,00,000) July 2006 3,50,000 Withdrawn from Parvara Sahakari Bank, Bhableshwar SB A/c 213 Total 26,00,000 Balance amount of Rs.7 lacs was payable to Shri Vikaram Shivare. However, till licence would bet transferred to Nashik, he had taken the shop on conducting basis for charges @ 47,000/- p.m. This balance amount was adjustable in the conducting charges. Payable 7,00,000 Total Consideration 33,00,000 As can be seen from the above table, the source of the loan and even the source of the sources appear to be all in cash and an arrangement made to explain the credits In the hands of the appellant to the extent of Rs. 26,00,000/-. Even the claim of repayment of loan doesn't appear to be genuine as from the bank statement of Prakash Gore in Parvara Sahakari Bank Ltd., It is seen that loan claimed to be repaid to P.N. Yadav and E.K. Kapase of Rs. 5,00,000/- and 4,00,000/- respectively on 23/10/2006 occurs after a cash deposit of Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
