THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. P.P.BHASKARAN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/17TH JYAISHTA, 1938 ITA.No. 44 of 2012 () ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA No.211/Coch/2011 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 22-09-2011 APPELLANT/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CALICUT.

BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT: --------------------- P.P.BHASKARAN ROMA ELECTRICALS, PARAKKAL, MAHE-673 310.

R BY ADV. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) R BY ADV. SRI.V.P.NARAYANAN R BY ADV. SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ITA No.44/2012 APPENDIX ANNEXURE-A A TRUE COPY OF COMPUTER PRINTOUT (A-KKG 1(15) ANNEXURE-B TRUE COPY OF SWORN STATEMENT RECORDED U/S. 132(4). ANNEXURE-C TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 131 OF THE ACT. ANNEXURE-D TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE ASSESSEE RETRACTED HIS STATEMENT VIDE LETTER DATED 29.7.2009. ANNEXURE-E A TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2009. ANNEXURE-F A TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 14.12.2010. ANNEXURE-G A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DTD. 22.9.2011. ANNEXURE-H TRUE COPY OF THE INSTRUCTION NO.3/2011 DATED 9.2.2011. TRUE COPY p.s.to judge CSS/

Antony Dominic & Dama Seshadri Naidu, JJ. ------------------------------------------- ITA No.44 of 2012 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of June, 2016 JUDGMENT Antony Dominic, J. This appeal is filed by the revenue challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kochi in ITA No.211 of 2011, whereby addition of undisclosed investment made under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act was set aside by the Tribunal. On facts, we notice that pursuant to a search that was conducted on 30.5.2007, assessment was completed under Section 143(3) read with section 153C of the Income Tax Act. It is in that assessment for the year 2005-2006, an addition of `24,83,346/- was made at the hands of the respondent on the

I.T.Appeal No.44 of 2012 2 assumption that he made such an undisclosed investment in a property in Koothuparamba, which was purchased by a firm of which he is also a partner. It is stated by the learned senior counsel for the respondent assessee that similar orders were passed by the Tribunal in the case of other partners and that, based on the applications filed by the parties, the said orders were recalled by the Tribunal and that the appeals are pending before the Tribunal. Taking note of the fact that the issues raised in this appeal are now being reconsidered by the Tribunal itself in ITA Nos.718, 719, 724, 725, 737 and 738 of 2010 filed by the other partners of the firm, we deem it only appropriate to set aside the order impugned herein and remit the matter back to the Tribunal. Accordingly, vacating the order passed by the Tribunal setting aside the addition made towards undisclosed investment for the assessment year

I.T.Appeal No.44 of 2012 3 2005-2006, the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for reconsideration along with the other appeals mentioned above. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- Antony Dominic, Judge Sd/- Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge css/ true copy

P.S.To Judge