The ACIT Central Circle 1 Thane, v. Smt. Ila RAvindra Patil, Mumbai

ITSSA 433/MUM/2004 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 43319916 RSA 2004
Assessee PAN ABAPP6628A
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITSSA 433/MUM/2004
Duration Of Justice 7 year(s) 10 day(s)
Appellant The ACIT Central Circle 1 Thane,
Respondent Smt. Ila RAvindra Patil, Mumbai
Appeal Type Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted J
Tribunal Order Date 29-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 26-07-2011
Next Hearing Date 26-07-2011
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 19-07-2004
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'J' BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS) NO. 433/MUM/2004 (BLOCK PERIOD: 01.04.1990 TO 14.12.2000) ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-I SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL PAWAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MITRA CHHAYA OPP. RAVI PAT IL EDULJI ROAD CHARAI VS. GYMANSIUM AYRE ROAD THANE 400061 DOMBIVALI (E) PAN ABAPP 6628 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O. NO. 296/MUM/2007 (BLOCK PERIOD: 01.04.1990 TO 14.12.2000) SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-I MITRA CHHAYA OPP. RAVI PATIL PAWAR INDUSTRIAL ESTA TE GYMANSIUM AYRE ROAD VS. EDULJI ROAD CHARAI DOMBIVALI (E) THANE 400061 PAN ABAPP 6628 A CROSS OBJECTOR APPELLANT IN APPEAL REVENUE BY: MS. KUSUM INGALE ASSESSEE BY: SHRI H.N. MOTIWALLA & PIYUSH CHHAJED DATE OF HEARING: 26.07.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29.07.2011 O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH A.M. THESE ARE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE CIT(A) I THANE DATED 14.05.2004 AND CROSS OBJECTION BY THE A SSESSEE. 2. REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING FOUR GROUNDS: - 1. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ASSESSING CONDUCTING CH ARGES AT RS.15 000/- PER MONTH FOR THE PERIOD 15.7.98 TO FEB 2000 AS AGAINST RS.40 000/- PER MONTH ASSESSED BY THE A.O. 2. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ASSESSING CONDUCTING CHA RGES AT RS.15 000/- PER MONTH FOR THE PERIOD MAR 2000 TO NO V 2000 AS AGAINST RS.45 000/- PER MONTH ASSESSED BY THE A.O. IT(SS) NO. 433/M/04 & CO NO.296/M/07 SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL 2 3. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN TREATING CONDUCTING CHAR GES OF RS.1 20 000/- FOR THE BROKEN PERIOD AS REGULAR INCO ME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING SURCHARGE LEVIA BLE ON THE TAX ON THE ASSESSED UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 3. BRIEFLY STATED ASSESSEE BELONGS TO SHRI RAVINDRA P ATIL GROUP OF CASES WHEREIN SEARCH ACTION UNDER SECTION 132 WAS CONDUCT ED ON 14.12.2000. THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF M/S. HOTEL RELAX AT MANPADA RO AD DOMBAVILI WERE ALSO SEARCHED. ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME UPTO 2 15 000/- WHEREAS THE A.O. MADE THE ASSESSMENT DETERMINING TH E UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT RS.13 09 200/-. ONE OF THE ISSUES DECIDED BY THE CIT(A) WAS RECEIPT OF CONDUCTING CHARGES OF HOTEL RELAX. THE SEARCH REVEA LED THAT ASSESSEE WAS RUNNING HOTEL RELAX ON THE PREMISES PURCHASED IN TH E NAME OF ASSESSEES MOTHER-IN-LAW SMT. ANANDIBAI PATIL WHICH HAS A BA R-CUM-RESTAURANT ALSO. THE INVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTY WAS REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. IT WAS TRANSPIRED THAT THE HOTEL WAS BEING ACTUALLY RUN BY SHRI GOPAL SHETTY FROM 15.07.1998 ONWARDS ON A MONTHLY RENTAL OF RS.15 000 /-. AS PER THE A.O. CONDUCTING CHARGES RECEIVED FROM SHRI GOPAL SHETTY ON ACCOUNT OF HOTEL RELAX WAS RS.40 000/- PER MONTH AND NOT RS.15 000/- AS PER THE NOTINGS IN PAGE 38 OF BUNDLE 2. THE A.O. NOTED THAT THE CONDUC TING CHARGES WERE NOT REFLECTED CORRECTLY AND BASED ON PAGE 39 OF BUNDLE 2 HE WAS OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE RECEIVED RS.40 000/- FOR 19 MONTHS FR OM AUGUST 1998 TO FEBRUARY 2000 AND RS.45 000/- PER MONTH FROM MARCH 2000 TO NOVEMBER 2000. THE A.O. MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.11 65 000/- A S AGAINST THE AMOUNT ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE APPELLATE PROC EEDINGS IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE NOTINGS FOUND ON PAGE 39 OF THE DIARY SEIZED IN THE HANDS OF SHRI RAVINDRA PATIL ASSESSEES HUSBAND DO ES NOT REPRESENT THE TRANSACTIONS OF HOTEL RELAX AS SUCH BUT THE FIGURES REPRESENT THE DEPOSIT RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE BY GIVING THE PAN SHOP SITUATE D OUTSIDE THE HOTEL FOR WHICH COMPENSATION OF RS.4 000/- PER MONTH WAS RECE IVES WHICH IS INCREASED TO RS.4 500/- PER MONTH FROM MARCH 2000. ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE TRANSACTIONS IN THE PAGE AS PERTAINING TO THE T RANSACTIONS OF DEPOSIT AND INCOME OF PAN SHOP AND NOT CONDUCTING CHARGES OF HO TEL RELAX. THE MATTER IT(SS) NO. 433/M/04 & CO NO.296/M/07 SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL 3 IS REMANDED TO THE A.O. AND AFTER RECEIPT OF THE RE PORT CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. STATING AS UNDER: - 3.4 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT ORDER ALONG WITH SUBMISSIONS MADE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. I HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE REMAND REPORT DATED 12.02.2004 AND COUN TER COMMENTS MADE BY THE APPELLANT ON THE REMAND REPORT. IT IS S EEN THAT ADDITION OF RS.40 000/- PER MONTH ON ACCOUNT OF CONDUCTING C HARGES OF HOTEL RELAX FROM SHRI GOPAL SHETTY IS BASED ON ENTRIES IN PAGE 39 OF BUNDLE NO. 2 SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH FRO M THE BEDROOM OF SHRI RAVINDRA M. PATIL. FROM THE PERUSAL OF PAGE 39 IT IS SEEN THAT DEPOSIT OF RS.8.00 LAKHS IS MENTIONED IN THIS PAGE. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT NO. 40 IS MENTIONED WITH THE WORD PAN ON 14.07.98 . IN THE ANOTHER COL. 40 000/- IS MENTIONED WITH THE DATE 16.08.98. IN THIS COLUMN OTHER DATES LIKE 16.09.98 18.10.98 17.11.98 18.1 2.98 AND 27.01.99 ARE MENTIONED. BUT NO AMOUNT IS MENTIONED AGAINST THE OTHER DATES. THE CONCLUSION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE R IS THUS BASED ON 40 000/- WRITTEN AGAINST THE DATE 16.08.98 IN PAGE 39 OF BUNDLE NO. 2. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS APPELLANT HAS CONTENDED THAT DEPOSIT OF RS.8.00 LAKH WAS TO BE RECEIVED FROM SHR I GOPAL SHETTY TO WHOM HOTEL RELAX WAS GIVEN. SHRI GOPAL SHETTY HOWE VER HAD NOT GIVEN THIS DEPOSIT OF RS.8.00 LAKHS. APPELLANT ALSO REFERRED TO STATEMENT OF SHRI GOPAL K. SHETTY DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ON 14.12.2000. IN THE SEARCH STATEMENT SHRI GOPAL K. SHETTY HAD CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT HE WAS RUNNING HOTEL RELA X FOR WHICH HE WAS PAYING CONDUCTING CHARGES OF RS.15 000/- TO SMT . ILA R. PATIL. APPELLANT HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT APPELLANT WAS HAVING A PAN SHOP ATTACHED TO HOTEL RELAX. HOWEVER THIS PAN SHO P WAS NOT GIVEN TO SHRI GOPAL SHETTY. APPELLANT HAS CONTENDED THAT SHRI GOPAL SHETTY WAS HAVING A SEPARATE PAN SHOP IN THE VAIBHAV BUILD ING IN THE MANPADA ROAD DOMBIVILI AND NOT AT HOTEL RELAX. APP ELLANT HAS CONTENDED THAT SHRI GOPAL SHETTY WAS RUNNING A PAN SHOP IN THE VAIBHAV BUILDING SINCE 1978. THERE WAS NO NEED FOR MR. GOPAL SHETTY TO GIVE DEPOSIT OF RS.40 000/- FOR THE YEAR 1998. T HIS FACT HAS ALREADY BEEN CONFIRMED IN THE REMAND REPORT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE APPELLANT HAS CONTENDED THAT THE PAN S HOP OUTSIDE THE HOTEL RELAX WAS GIVEN TO ONE SHRI PADMNATH S. SHETT Y FOR A COMPENSATION OF RS.4000/- PER MONTH WITH DEPOSIT OF RS.40 000/- ON 16.08.1998. THE APPELLANT HAS GIVEN PHOTOCOPY OF AG REEMENT EXECUTED WITH SHRI PADMNATH S. SHEETY IN THIS REGAR D. IT IS THUS SEEN THAT PAN SHOP OUTSIDE HOTEL RELAX WAS TAKEN BY ONE SHRI PADMNATH S. SHETTY FOR A COMPENSATION OF RS.4000/- PER MONTH WITH DEPOSIT OF RS.40 000/- AND NOT BY SHRI GOPAL K. SHETTY. IT IS THUS SEEN THAT APPELLANT HAD RECEIVED RS.40 000/- ON 16.08.1998 FR OM ONE SHRI PADMNATH S. SHETTY FOR THE DEPOSIT OF PAN SHOP OUTS IDE HOTEL RELAX. THIS PAN SHOP WAS TAKEN FOR THE COMPENSATION OF RS. 4000/- PER MONTH. SO FAR AS HOTEL RELAX IS CONCERNED APPELLAN T WAS RECEIVING RS.15 000/- PER MONTH AS CONDUCTING CHARGES OF HOTE L RELAX FROM SHRI GOPAL K. SHETTY. THIS IS CONFIRMED BY STATEMEN T OF SHRI GOPAL K. IT(SS) NO. 433/M/04 & CO NO.296/M/07 SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL 4 SHETTY DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. IN THE STATEMEN T OF SHRI GOPAL K. SHETTY THERE IS NO MENTION OF CONDUCTING CHARGES O F RS.40 000/- IN CONNECTION WITH HOTEL RELAX. RECEIPT OF RS.40 000/- AS DEPOSIT FROM SHRI PADMNATH S. SHETTY IS CORROBORATED BY COPY OF AGREEMENT OF THE APPELLANT WITH SHRI PADMNATH S. SHETTY DATED 16.08. 98. IN THIS AGREEMENT RECEIPT OF RS.40 000/- ON 16.08.98 IS CL EARLY MENTIONED. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT GIVEN ANY FURTHER CORROBO RATIVE EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT APPELLANT WAS RECEIVING RS.40 000/- PER MONTH AS CONDUCTING CHARGES FOR HOTEL RELAX DURING THE BLOCK PERIOD. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND THE STATEMENT OF SHRI PADMNATH S. S HETTY I AM OF THE OPINION THAT APPELLANT WAS RECEIVING RS.15 000/- FR OM SHRI PADMNATH S. SHETTY FROM 15 TH JULY 1998 TO FEBRUARY 2000. IN ADDITIONAL TO THIS APPELLANT WAS ALSO RECEIVING RS.4000/- PER MO NTH FROM AUGUST 1998 TO FEBRUARY 2000 FROM THE PAN SHOP GIVEN TO S HRI PADMNATH S. SHETTY ON A COMPENSATION OF RS.4000/- PER MONTH WIT H DEPOSIT OF RS.40 000/- ON 16.08.1998. TOTAL UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR THE PERIOD 15 TH JULY 98 TO FEBRUARY 00 IS THUS WORKED OUT AT RS. 3 66 500/- (19.5 MONTHS X 15 000 PLUS 18.5 MONTH X 4000). OUT OF RS.19 000/- RS.15 000/- IS ON ACCOUNT OF CONDUCTING CHARGES FOR HOTEL RELAX AND BALANCE SUM OF RS.4000/- IS ON ACCOUNT OF CONDUCTIN G CHARGES OF PAN SHOP OUTSIDE HOTEL RELAX. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS I HEREBY CONFIRM THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OUT OF CONDUCTING CHARGES HOTEL RELAX AND PAN SHOP AT RS.3 66 500/- FOR THE PERIOD 15 TH JULY 1998 TO FEBRUARY 2000 AGAINST RS.7 60 000/- COMPUTED IN THE BLOCK AS SESSMENT ORDER. 4. SIMILARLY THE LATER PERIOD OF MARCH 2000 TO NOVEMBE R 2000 IT WAS CONSIDERED RS.45 000/- PER MONTH BY THE A.O WAS ALS O FIXED AT RS.15 000/- PER MONTH ALONG WITH THE PAN SHOP RENT RECEIVED. TH US ON THESE TWO ISSUES REVENUE HA RAISED GROUND NOS. 1 & 2. IN ADDITION TO THE REFIXING THE CONDUCTING CHARGES THE A.O. ALSO BROUGHT TO TAX AN AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION RECEIVABLE FROM HOTEL RELAX AT RS.1 20 000/- FOR TH E PERIOD 01.04.2000 TO 30.11.2000. THE REASON FOR BRINING THIS AMOUNT WAS THAT NO RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. THEREF ORE THE AMOUNT WAS TO BE TAXED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE CIT(A) AFTER CONS IDERING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE PARA 5.2 DELETED THE ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: - 5.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSION MADE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. I HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE REMAND REPORT. IT IS SEEN THAT APPELLAN T WAS RECEIVING MONTHLY COMPENSATION FROM GOPAL K. SHETTY BY CHEQUE FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.04.2000 TO 30.11.2000. THIS WAS PART OF THE YEAR IN WHICH SEARCH HAD TAKEN PLACE. IT IS SEEN THAT CHEQUE RECE IVED BY THE APPELLANT IS RECORDED IN THE BANK RECORD OF THE APP ELLANT. IT IS SEEN THAT DATE OF FILING OF RETURN FOR A.Y. 2001-02 HAD NOT E XPIRED. THE RECEIPT OF IT(SS) NO. 433/M/04 & CO NO.296/M/07 SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL 5 RS.15 000/- PER MONTH FROM SHRI GOPAL K. SHETTY WAS DULY RECORDED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT. IN THE REGULAR R ETURN FOR A.Y. 2001- 02 AFTER THE DATE OF SEARCH COMPENSATION FROM SHR I GOPAL K. PUROHIT ON ACCOUNT OF HOTEL RELAX HAS BEEN DULY DECLARED. I T IS SEEN THAT COST OF CAR PURCHASED BY THE APPELLANT WAS RS.6 91 000/-. O UT OF THIS RS.1 91 000/- WAS PAID BY CHEQUE DRAWN FROM APPELLA NTS REGULAR BANK ACCOUNT ALREADY DECLARED TO THE DEPARTMENT PRI OR TO THE DATE OF SEARCH. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS ASSESSING OFFICER I S DIRECTED TO GIVE DEDUCTION FOR THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION RECEIVABLE FROM MR. GOPAL SHETTY FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2000 TO 30.11.2000 AT R S.1 20 000/- FROM RUNNING OF HOTEL RELAX IN THE COMPUTATION OF UNDISC LOSED INCOME. REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED ON THIS VIDE GROUND NO. 3. 5. THE LEARNED D.R. REFERRED TO THE NOTINGS IN PAGE 39 AND OBSERVED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE AMOUNT WHICH WAS BASED ON SEIZED MATERIAL. THE LEARNED A.R. HOWEVER SUBMITTED THAT AS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TH E CIT(A) THE TRANSACTION PERTAINS TO PAN SHOP AND NOT TO HOTEL RELAX AND FUR THER SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O. IN THE HANDS OF SHRI GOPAL SHETTY HAS NOT BROU GHT ANY AMOUNT AS PAID OUTSIDE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. EVEN IN THAT CASE THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AVAILABLE WITH REFERENCE TO CONDUCTING OF HOTEL REL AX THE PAYMENT WAS ONLY RS.15 000/-. THEREFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICERS STAN D OR RECEIVING HIGHER AMOUNT WAS NOT BORNE OUT OF FACTS. WITH REFERENCE T O ADDITION OF RS.1 20 000/- HE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE ISSUE. ON EXAMINATION OF FAC TS PURSUING THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS PLACED ON RECORD AND THE STATEMENT RECORDED FROM SHRI GOPAL SHETTY AND ALSO PURUSING THE ORDER OF SHRI GO PAL SHETTY WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO DIFFER FROM THE FI NDINGS OF THE CIT(A). IN OUR OPINION THE A.O. HAS WRONGLY INTERPRETED THE AMOUNT OF RS.40 000/- STATED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED ON 16.08.1998 AS THAT OR RENT PERTAINING TO HOTEL RELAX. IN FACT THERE WAS NO FURTHER ENTRIES UNDER A NY COLUMN TILL 18.03.2000 WHERE AN AMOUNT OF RS.45 000/- WAS MENTIONED. AS EX PLAINED BY ASSESSEE THIS PERTAINS TO DEPOSIT OF RS.40 000/- RECEIVED FR OM PAN SHOP. SINCE THE SEIZED MATERIAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI GOPAL SHETTY AL SO INDICATE PAYMENT OF RS.15 000/- OF THE TRANSACTION BEING OUT OF THE BOO KS OF ACCOUNT THERE CANNOT BE ANY FURTHER ADDITION ON PRESUMPTIONS. IN FACT THE A.O. IN THE CASE OF SHRI GOPAL SHETTY ALSO GIVES A FINDING THA T THE AMOUNT RECORDED WAS IT(SS) NO. 433/M/04 & CO NO.296/M/07 SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL 6 ONLY RS.15 000/- AND THERE WAS CLAIM AGAINST HOTEL RELAX MAINTENANCE CHARGES ALSO WAS RS.15 000/-. IN VIEW OF THE EVIDEN CE ON RECORD AND EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS DULY CONSIDER ED BY THE CIT(A) WE UPHOLD THE ORDER AND REJECT GROUND NOS. 1 & 2. 7. WITH REFERENCE TO GROUND NO. 3 AFTER CONSIDERING T HE ARGUMENTS OF THE LEARNED D.R. AND LEARNED COUNSEL WE ARE OF THE OPIN ION THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO BRING TO TAX THE AMOUNT OF CONDUCTING CHARGES RE CEIVED DURING THE YEAR WHEN THE ACCOUNTS HAVE NOT BEEN CLOSED AND THERE IS NO DUE DATE FOR FILING THE RETURN. IN FACT THE AMOUNT OF RS.15 000/- WAS P AID BY WAY OF CHEQUE REGULARLY. THEREFORE THE CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN DELE TING THE ADDITION SEPARATELY MADE IN THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT. THEREFORE THIS GROUND IS ALSO REJECTED. 8. GROUND NO. 4 PERTAINS TO THE DELETION OF SURCHARGE PAYABLE ON THE TAX ON DISCLOSED INCOME. THE A.O. CHARGED SURCHARGE AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT WHICH WAS DELETED BY THE CIT(A) AFTER ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL GROUND FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE ITAT PUNE BENCH IN TH E CASE OF MRS. ARUNA M. KATARIA VS. DCIT REPORTED IN 82 TTJ 363. 9. IT WAS FAIRLY CONCEDED BY BOTH THE COUNSELS THAT TH IS ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST ASSESSEE AND IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE BY TH E ORDER OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RAJIV BHATARA 310 ITR 105 WHEREIN THE LEVY OF SURCHARGE WAS UPHELD HOLDING AS UNDER: - PURSUANT TO A SEARCH CONDUCTED ON APRIL 6 2000 U NDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO THE BLOCK PERIOD APRIL 1 1990 TO JULY 3 2000 WAS DETECTED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IMPOSED S URCHARGE ON THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HELD THAT THE SURCHARGE WAS NOT LEVIABLE SINCE THE SEARCH HAD TAK EN PLACE PRIOR TO JUNE 1 2002. THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UPHELD THE ORD ER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). THE HIGH COURT DISMISSED TH E APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT. ON APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT: HELD REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT THA T SURCHARGE LEVIABLE UNDER THE FINANCE ACT WAS A DISTINCT CHARGE NOT DEP ENDENT FOR ITS LEVIABILLITY ON THE ASSESSEES LIABILITY TO PAY INC OME-TAX BUT ON ASSESSED TAX. THEREFORE EVEN WITHOUT THE PROVISO T O SECTION 113 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 RELATING TO TAX IN THE CA SE OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT OF SEARCH CASES THE FINANCE ACT 2001 WAS APPLICABLE TO IT(SS) NO. 433/M/04 & CO NO.296/M/07 SMT. ILA RAVINDRA PATIL 7 BLOCK ASSESSMENT UNDER CHAPTER XIV-B IN RELATION TO THE SEARCH INITIATED ON APRIL 6 2000 AND ACCORDINGLY SURCHAR GE WAS LEVIABLE. 10. SINCE THE FACTS ARE SIMILAR TO THE ABOVE CASE WE S ET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE A.O. IN LEVY ING SURCHARGE. ACCORDINGLY THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED. REVENUES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 11. ASSESSEE HAS RAISED CO NO. 296/MUM/2007 ON THE ISSU E OF CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 40 000/- AS INVESTM ENT IN PURCHASE OF STAMPS AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.15 000/- P R MONTH RECEIVED BY WAY OF CHEQUES TOWARDS CONDUCTING CHARGES IN THE BL OCK ASSESSMENT. IN THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ASSESSEE WITHDREW T HE CROSS OBJECTION BY FILING A LETTER IN WRITING FOR WHICH THE LEARNED D. R. HAS NO OBJECTION. ACCORDINGLY THE CROSS OBJECTION IS PERMITTED TO BE WITHDRAWN. 12. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS PARTLY AND THE CROSS OBJECTION IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JULY 2011. SD/- SD/- (R.S. PADVEKAR) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI DATED: 29 TH JULY 2011 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) I THANE 4. THE CIT CENTRAL PUNE 5. THE DR J BENCH ITAT MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI N.P.