M/S VIDARBHA SPRINGS PRIVATE LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,WARD -6(1), NAGPUR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK RIPOTE
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2006-2007,
arises against the CIT(A)-4, Nagpur’s Order No.CIT(A)-4/ 249/13-
14, dated 31.01.2017, involving proceedings u/s.153A r.w.s. 143(3)
of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that
both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in adding
the alleged undisclosed income of Rs.30 lakhs, we note that the
CIT(A)'s corresponding detailed discussion to this effect reads as
under :
2 ITA.No.273/NAG./2018
3 ITA.No.273/NAG./2018
4 ITA.No.273/NAG./2018
5 ITA.No.273/NAG./2018
6 ITA.No.273/NAG./2018
Suffice to say, it has come on record with the able
assistance coming from both the sides that this is an instance
of a search action dated 07.11.2006 carried out by the
department u/sec.132 of the Act. And that the departmental
authorities had come across the relevant seized material
representing a book marked as “Annexure B-1 to 6” [pages 1
to 17] during this search indicating assessee’s cash payments
of Rs.30 lakhs for acquiring plot/flat/shop, as the case may
be, involving four instances of Rs.10 lakhs, Rs.5 lakhs and
Rs.7.5 lakhs [twice], respectively made to the another searched
person Shri Vilas Harde. This made the learned lower
authorities to treat the sum total of the foregoing four
instances to the tune of Rs.30 lakhs as assessee’s undisclosed
income. It is in this backdrop that the things are crystal clear
before us that the impugned addition is indeed based in seized
material only carrying presumption of correctness u/sec.292C
of the Act.
Faced with the situation, the assessee’s case before
us is that the department has failed to prove the clinching
nexus that Shri Vilas Harde herein is assessee’s director or
share holder, as the case may be and, therefore, the impugned
addition deserves to be deleted. Learned counsel next invited
our attention to the tribunal’s first round order dated
26.06.2011 setting aside the matter to the Assessing Officer in
very terms. We are afraid that even if it is accepted that the
7 ITA.No.273/NAG./2018 learned lower authorities have failed to prove assessee’s nexus
with Shri Vilas Harde, we are of the considered view that such
a lapse would not invalidate the impugned addition itself
which is based on seized incriminating material only. We
reiterate that this tribunal’s another coordinate bench’s order
in Shri Vilas Harde’s case (supra) has already examined the
entire facts and circumstances in concluding that the said
cash entries of Rs.30 lakhs indeed involved cash payments by
assessee only. We find no merit in assessee’s instant technical
arguments in these facts and circumstances. The impugned
addition stand confirmed therefore. Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.09.2023.
Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Pune, Dated 28th September, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A)-2, Nagpur. 4. The PCIT concerned 5. D.R. ITAT, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. 6. Guard File.
//By Order// //True Copy //
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.
8 ITA.No.273/NAG./2018
S.No. Details Date 1 Draft dictated on 25.09.2023 Sr.PS 2 Draft placed before author 26.09.2023 Sr.PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Author .09.2023 J.M. 4 .09.2023 A.M. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS .09.2023 Sr.PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on .09.2023 Sr.PS 7 Date of uploading of Order .09.2023 Sr.PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk .09.2023 Sr.PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order
