Sri AV Seshagiri Rao, Bheemunipatnam v. The ITO, Ward-5(2), Visakhapatnam

ITA 213/VIZ/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 08-10-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 21325314 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AGQPA5104R
Bench Visakhapatnam
Appeal Number ITA 213/VIZ/2010
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant Sri AV Seshagiri Rao, Bheemunipatnam
Respondent The ITO, Ward-5(2), Visakhapatnam
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 08-10-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 08-10-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 28-09-2010
Next Hearing Date 28-09-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 25-03-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 213 /VIZAG/ 20 10 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 SRI A.V. SESHAGIR I RAO BHEEMUNIPATNAM ITO WARD - 5(2) VISAKHAPATNAM (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AGQPA 5104R APPELLANT BY: SHRI C.V.S. MURTHY CA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH DR ORDER PER SHRI S.K. YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THIS APPEAL IS PREFERR ED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON A SOLITARY GROUND THAT CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.8 25 000/ - MADE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DOCUMENTS PLACED ON RECORD. 3. THE FACTS BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORD ON THE IMPUGNED ISSUE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A DOCUMENT WRITER BY PROFESSION AND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY U/S 133A THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED THAT HE HAS MADE AN INVESTMENT OF RS.10 60 000/ - IN THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. OUT OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT OF RS.10 60 000/ - THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF RS.8 25 000/ - AND THE SAME HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE AS SESSEES AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. 4. ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE A.O. SOUGHT CLARIFICATION INQUIRING WHY THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DISCLOSE THE INVESTMENT OF RS.10 60 000/ - ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY HIM. IN RESPONSE THERETO IT WAS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT HE HAD NOT MADE MORE INVESTMENT THAN WHAT WAS REFLECTED IN THE REGISTERED DOCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY OPERATION. IT WAS FURTHER S UBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE 2 WHATSOEVER WITH THE A.O. EVIDENCING THAT ASSESSEE HAS MADE HIGHER INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF SAID SITES EITHER IN THE FORM OF LOOSE SHEETS OR BY INFORMATION FROM THE SELLER. THE ADDITION WAS MADE ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. HE PLACED A RELIANCE UPON A JUDGEMENT OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF PULLANGODE RUBBER PRODUCE CO. LTD. VS. STATE OF KERALA 91 ITR 18(SC) AND CBDT CIRCULAR NO.286/2/2003 IT (INV. DATED 1.3.2003) WHEREIN IT IS CLEARLY STATED THAT A.O. SHOULD RELY UPON THE EVIDENCE/MATERIALS GATHERED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH/SURVEY OPERATION WHILE FRAMING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT ORDER. THOUGH CIT(A) RE - EXAMINED THE ISSUE BUT WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE EXPLANATIO NS OF THE ASSESSEES AND HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS. NOW THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE US AND REITERATED ITS CONTENTIONS. 5. THE LD. D.R. PLACED A HEAVY RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 6. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDE R OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE NOT ONLY ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY BUT ALSO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS T HAT HE HAS MADE THE INVESTMENT MORE THAN THE AMOUNT DECLARED IN THE SALE DEED. THESE FACTS ARE SPECIF ICALLY RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED THE RELIANCE UPON A CBDT CIRCULAR AND THE JUDGEMENT OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF PULLANGODE RUBBER PRODUCE CO. LTD. VS. STATE OF KERALA (SUPRA) BUT THE RATIO OF THIS JUDGEMENT AN D THE CIRCULAR CANNOT BE APPLIED IN THE INSTANT CASE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE SAID ADDITION. THE AFORESAID JUDGEMENT AND CIRCULAR CAN BE APPLIED IN THOSE CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE MADE AN ADMISSION DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OR SURVEY AND LATER ON HE RETRACTED FROM HIS EARLIER STATEMENT. BUT IN THE INSTANT CASE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED EVEN DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE SAID ADDITIONS. THEREFORE IT IS AN AGREED ADDI TION AND THE ASSESSEE HAS LOST EVERY RIGHT TO CHALLENGE THE SAME IN SUBSEQUENT STAGE. THEREFORE WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. 3 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8.10 .20 10 SD / - SD/ - (BR BASKARAN) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM DATED 8 TH OCTOBER 20 10 COPY TO 1 SRI A.V. SESHAGIRI RAO DR.NO.4 - 105 NERALLAVALASA COLONY BHEEMUNIPATNAM VIZAG DIST. 2 ITO WARD - 5(2 ) VISAKHAPATNAM 3 THE CI T VISAKHAPATNAM 4 THE CIT (A) VISAKHAPATNAM 5 THE DR ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM