Shri M.Murali Mohan, CHENNAI v. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITSSA 103/CHNY/2002 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 10321716 RSA 2002
Assessee PAN AANPM2661C
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITSSA 103/CHNY/2002
Duration Of Justice 8 year(s) 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant Shri M.Murali Mohan, CHENNAI
Respondent DCIT, CHENNAI
Appeal Type Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
Pronouncement Date 05-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 05-08-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 05-08-2010
Next Hearing Date 05-08-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 31-05-2002
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH A BEFORE SHRI PRADEEP PARIKH VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T(SS).A. NO.85/MDS/2002 BLOCK PERIOD : 1-4-88 TO 20-3-1999 THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX MEDIA CIRCLE - I CHENNAI 34. VS. SHRI M. MURALI MOHAN 12 VIJAYARAGHAVA ROAD T. NAGAR CHENNAI 17. PAN AANPM 2661 C. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T(SS).A. NO.103/MDS/2002 BLOCK PERIOD : 1-4-88 TO 20-3-1999 SHRI M. MURALI MOHAN T. NAGAR CHENNAI 17. VS. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CHENNAI 34. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB ASSESSEE BY : NONE O R D E R PER PRADEEP PARIKH V.P. THESE CROSS APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 21.2.2002 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1988 TO 20.3.1999. WE FIND IT CONVENIENT TO DISPOSE OF B OTH THE APPEALS TOGETHER BY THIS COMBINED ORDER. 2. THE DEPARTMENT IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE DELETION O F THE ADDITIONS AGGREGATING TO ` 3 40 28 000/- WHICH WERE MADE PROTECTIVELY. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINS T THE SUSTENANCE OF THE ADDITION OF ` 5 LACS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH. 2 IT(SS)A 85 & 103/02 3. THE ASSESSEE INDIVIDUAL IS A FILM ARTIST FILM PRO DUCER AND ALSO RUNS A REAL ESTATE BUSINESS. HE IS THE CHA IRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M.M. FINANCIERS PVT. LTD.(MMFL ) AND ALSO PARTNER IN SHRI JAYABERI ART PRODUCTIONS. MMFL IS CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT . SEARCH UNDER SEC.132 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT) WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSE SSEE AT HYDERABAD ON 20.3.1999. SIMULTANEOUSLY SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF MMFL AND OTHE R CONNECTED PLACES. VARIOUS INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS W ERE SEIZED. CASH BALANCE OF ` 6 73 610/- WAS FOUND FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE OUT OF WHICH ` 5 LACS WERE SEIZED. PURSUANT TO THE NOTICE UNDER SEC.158BC OF THE ACT ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT ` NIL. HOWEVER THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AT A TOT AL UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF ` 3 46 41 610/-. THE BREAK-UP OF THE SAME IS AS FOLLOWS : (1) UNACCOUNTED CASH PAYMENTS TOWARDS PURCHASE OF LAND ` 1 49 40 000/- (2) SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF 22 ACRES OF LAND ` 69 10 000/- (3) UNDISCLOSED INTEREST INCOME ` 1 21 78 000/- (4) UNEXPLAINED CASH ` 6 13 610/- TOTAL ` 3 46 41 610/- THE ABOVE INCOME WAS ASSESSED ON PROTECTIVE BASIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE STAND TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT IN T HE BLOCK ASSESSMENT OF MMFL. 3 IT(SS)A 85 & 103/02 4. THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITIONS MENTIONED AT ITEM NOS. (1) TO (3) ABOVE ON THE GROUND THAT THESE ADDI TIONS WHICH WERE MADE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS IN THE CASE OF MMFL WERE CONFIRMED IN APPEAL ALSO. WITH REGARD TO THE A DDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH HE SUSTAINED THE ADDIT ION TO THE EXTENT OF ` 5 LACS BEING THE AMOUNT SEIZED DURING THE SEARCH. 5. AS MENTIONED ABOVE EXCEPT FOR THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH REMAINING ADDITIONS WERE MADE ON SUBSTANTIVE BASIS IN THE CASE OF MMFL. THE MATTER I N THE CASE OF MMFL HAD TRAVELLED TO THE TRIBUNAL IN IT(SS)A NO.17/MDS/2002. A COPY OF THE ORDER IS PLACED ON RE CORD. THE TRIBUNAL BY ITS ORDER DATED 8.12.2006 DELETED A LL THE ADDITIONS. CONSIDERING THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER T HE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS RENDERED INFRUCTUOUS SINCE IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ADDITIONS WERE ON PROTECTIVE BASI S. THEREFORE THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT HAS TO BE R EJECTED. SO FAR AS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ADDITION OF ` 5 LACS IS CONCERNED WE DISMISS THE SAME ON ACCOUNT OF NON- PROSECUTION. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT REMAINED PRESENT DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. 6. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 5-8-2010. SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (PRADEEP PARIKH) VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI DATED THE 5 TH AUGUST 2010 MPO* COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR