Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Jagmohandas D.Mehta,Huf, Surat vs Department Of Income Tax on 6 November, 2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD "D" BENCH AHMEDABAD
आयकर अपील
य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ 'डी'
BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER.
ITA. No. 1508/Ahd/2011
(Assessment Year:2008-09)
Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax,
Circle-2, Room No.110, Aayakar
Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat - 395001 Appellant
Vs.
Shri Haresh Jagmohandas Mehta
Plot No. 7/B, Jawahar Road No.1,
Udyog Nagar, Udhana, Surat. Respondent
PAN: ABXPM7550P
&
ITA. No. 1509/Ahd/2011
(Assessment Year:2008-09)
Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax,
Circle-2, Room No.110, Aayakar
Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat - 395001 Appellant
Vs.
Shri Vijay Jagmohandas Mehta
Plot No. 5419, Road No.6, Nr. Water
Tank, GIDC, Sachin, Surat. Respondent
PAN: ADHPM1690A
&
ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.)
A.Y. 2008-09 -2-
ITA. No. 1510/Ahd/2011
(Assessment Year:2008-09)
Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax,
Circle-2, Room No.110, Aayakar
Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat - 395001 Appellant
Vs.
Shri Jagmohandas Mehta, HUF,
Plot No. 5419, Road No.6, Nr. Water
Tank, GIDC, Sachin, Surat. Respondent
PAN: AABHJ3060Q
आवेदक क ओर से / By Assessee : Shri S. N. Soparkar, A.R.
राज
व क ओर से / By Revenue : Shri Raj Deep Singh,
Sr.D.R.
सन
ु वाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 06.10.2015
घोषणा क तार ख/Date of
Pronouncement : 06.11.2015
ORDER
PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
These three Revenue's appeals for assessment year 2008- 09, arise from orders of the CIT(A) - II, Surat, dated 14.03.2011 in case of Shri Haresh J. Mehta and 15.03.2011 in case of Shri Vijay Jagmohandas Mehta and Shri Jagmohandas Mehta (HUF), passed in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter 'the Act'.
2. Both the parties at the outset take us to ITA No.1508/Ahd/2011 raising two substantive grounds inter alia challenging the lower appellate order deleting additions of ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 -3- unaccounted investment of Rs.94,99,500/- u/s.69B and that of unaccounted and undisclosed capital gains of Rs.98,86,250/- made in the course of a regular assessment framed on 27.12.2010.
3. This appeal pertains to the assessee/individual Shri Haresh Jagmohandas Mehta. He purchased agricultural land measuring 4500 sq.mtrs. comprised in TP 2, RS No. 106/3, Final Plot No.160 at Vesu, Surat on 12.03.2008 @ Rs.473/- per sq. mtr. The total cost of this chunk came to be Rs.11,16,000/-. Its jantri price was Rs.105/- per sq.mtr. We come to the latter ground and find that the very assessee sold his half share of land at TP No.6, RS No.247/1/2 in the same locality Vesu, Surat on 10.01.2008 measuring 2340 sq. mtrs. for sale price of Rs.20.75 lacs @ Rs.1100/- per sq. mtr. Jantri price of this parcel of land was Rs.105/- per sq. mtr.
4. The Assessing Officer took up scrutiny. He was of the view that assessee had understated his purchase as well as sale price hereinabove since this Vesu locality adjoined to premier educational, residential and commercial projects as well as the City Airport. He appears to have quoted the Surat Urban Development Authority auction prices ranging between Rs.5000/- per sq. mtr. To Rs.13,200/- per sq.mtr. in financial year 2005-06. We further notice that ld. Assessing Officer took cognizance of the fact that the State Government had revised jantri price of the developed land to that @ Rs.12000/- per sq.mtr. from 01.04.2008 and agricultural one @ Rs.6000/-. The assessee objected to this action by inter alia pleading that its undeveloped lands (both agricultural and non agricultural) could ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 -4- not be valued at par with the SUDA auction rate hereinabove as well as the revised jantri prices effective only from 01.04.2008 could not be applied with retrospective aspect. He stated that its purchase as well as sale prices were the most appropriate. There was no evidence to be their under statement. No fault was found with the relevant books. There was no unaccounted investment forthcoming. We find that all these pleadings failed to impress upon the Assessing Officer. He was of the view that the State Government had revised jantri prices decades back. He observed that the revised jantri prices w.e.f. 01.04.2008 hereinabove could be suitable adjusted for ascertaining correct value of assessee's properties subject matter of sale and purchase in question. He proceeded accordingly by giving 25% rebate in their revised jantri prices and computed purchased price of the land to be Rs.1,06,15,500/- (Rs.4500/- @ 75% of the revised jantri prices of Rs.6000/- multiplied by area of the land measuring 2359 mtrs.). The same was reduced to the declared purchase price of Rs.11,16,000/- as shown in the accounts resulting in the balance sum of Rs.94,99,500/- being added as unaccounted investment.
5. The case file reveals that the Assessing Officer adopted the very formula for computing an addition of Rs.98,86,250/- qua assessee's lands sold. The same stood added as unaccounted sale proceeds.
6. The assessee preferred the appeal. The CIT(A) deleted both the impugned additions as under:
ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 -5-
"4.1 I have duly considered the discussion made in the assessment order and the submission of the appellant. The additions made in the assessment order can be summarized as under:
(i) Addition on account of unaccounted investment u/s.69B of the Act.
(a) Land purchased at Vesu. : Rs.94,99,500/-
(b) Land purchased at Dumas : Rs.36,60,675/-
(ii) Addition on account of undisclosed capital gain on sale of
land at Vesu. : Rs.98,86,250/-.
4.2 Grounds of appeal no. 1,2,5,&6 are relating to two additions made u/s. 69B of the Act, whereas grounds of appeal no. 3 & 4 are relating to addition on account of undisclosed capital gain on sale of land at Vesu. Ground of appeal no. 7 is general in nature, as well as argument in support of grounds of appeal no. 1 to 6, hence, shall not be dealt separately; but considered as pail; of the above grounds of appeal.
4.3 The issues raised in the grounds of appeal no. 1,2,5 & 6 are common hence, all the four grounds of appeal are taken together for discussion and disposal, The appellant has primarily raised three issues in the above grounds of appeal, viz. -
(i) Whether new jantri rates made effective from 01-04-2008 can be applied retrospectively by the assessing officer to the purchase of land effected on 11-07-2007, [there is mistake in the order, as correct date of purchase is 12-03-
2008 and not 11-07-2007] and 10-09-2007 respectively.
(ii) Whether, in addition to the new jantri rates, Assessing Officer has brought any other corroborative evidence on record to justify alleged unaccounted investment. (iii) Whether section 69B of the Act, can be invoked in the case of the appellant for making above additions of Rs.94,99,500/- and Rs.36,60,600/-.
4.4 All the above issues are independent of each other. In respect of the first issue, the Assessing Officer's observation is that new jantri rates of 6,000/- per sq. mtr. is effective for the land in Vesu area w.e.f. 01-04-2008, and though the appellant has purchased the land in Vesu area on 12-03-2008 (correct date taken), the difference in both dates is only of 19 days (correct difference between the two dates taken). He has, therefore, after allowing deduction of 25% in the new jantri rate effective 01-04-2008, adopted the rate of Rs.4,500/- per sq. mtr. as the rate per sq. mtr. for purchase of land by the appellant in Vesu on 12-03-2008 [correct date taken), as against Rs.473 per sq. mtr. as per the sale deed. The same logic has been applied in the purchase of land made by the appellant on 10-09-2007 in the Dumas area, which has been purchased approximately seven months before the new jantri ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 -6- rates became effective from 01-04-2008, as per which, the sale rate fixed for jantri purposes in Dumas area was Rs.700/- to Rs.1,000/- per sq. mtr. The Assessing Officer, therefore, after giving reduction of 2.5% from the rate of Rs.700/- per sq. mtr., adopted the rate of Rs.525/- per sq. mtr. to determine the purchase cost of the land in Dumas area. The Assessing Officer for making the above additions, has also taken into consideration the auction price of the land in the Vesu area during the period 05-04-2005 to 20-12-2006, which is ranging from Rs.500//- per sq. mtr. to Rs.7711/- per sq. mtr. for the residential plots of land, Rs.7,500/- to Rs. 11,425/- for school and play ground plots and Rs. 6,555/- to Rs.13,200/- for commercial plots. The location of all the plots of land auctioned are in TP-1, of Vesu area. In respect of purchase of land in Dumas area, the Assessing Officer has not brought on record any instances of auction or sale of plots on record, the appellant was, therefore, confronted by the Assessing Officer with the above 12 instances of auction of plot of land in Vesu by SUDA. In so far as the appellant's contention that the addition is not justified, because it has been made only on the basis of jantri rates is concerned, I do not find any merit in this argument as the Assessing Officer has not adopted the jantri rate of 01-04-2008 for making the addition, though he has taken the same as basis for arriving at the probable market rate during the period of purchase of the plots of land by the appellant. The issue which, therefore, requires attention is as to whether the above instances of sale taken by the Assessing Officer can be taken as comparable Instances for determining the purchase cost of the land: bought: by the appellant in Vesu and Dumas, and whether on the basis of the said instances, additions made by the Assessing Officer is justified. The appellant has vide reply dated 04-03-2011, reproduced above given 16 instances of sale of open agricultural plots in Vesu area including R.S. No. 106/1 in TP no.2, where agricultural land purchased by the appellant is located. The purchase rate per sq. mtr. In the instances given by the appellant ranges from Rs.46/- to Rs.202/- per sq. mtr. And the date of purchase of these plots of land are from December 2004 to March 2008. The agricultural land in the Vesu area was purchased by the appellant at the rate of Rs.473/- per sq. mtr. In the same area, a plot of land of the size of 2400 sq. mtr. Was purchased on 22-03-2008 @ Rs. 130/- per sq. mtr. Further, in the above 16 instances of purchase of plots of land in the Vesu area in the Financial Years 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08, furnished by the appellant, the maximum selling rate per sq. mtr., is Rs.202/- per sq. mtr., i.e. on 05.11.2007, and in the three instances where open agricultural plot of land has been purchased in March 2008, the maximum purchase rate is Rs.166/- per sq. mtr. The appellant has also enclosed copy of 'index' obtained from the office of the sub-registrar in respect of all 16 instances of purchase of open agricultural plot vide Annexure-4 to the written submission dated 04-03- 2011. Upon due consideration of the same, I find that the Assessing Officer has incorrectly taken the auction rates for purchase of plots for residential, commercial and school and play ground as indicators for determining the purchase price of the plots of land at Vesu and Dumas, ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 -7- in the case of the appellant. The plots of land purchased by the appellant in Vesu and Dumas are agricultural land can be applied. I, therefore, hold that instances of auction sale of plots cited by the Assessing Officer have no relevance to the agricultural, land purchased by the appellant, and cannot be considered as comparable cases. Accordingly, in the absence of any relevant corroborative evidence, the jantri rates taken as base rate to determine the possible market rate of the agricultural plots of land purchased by the appellant, are also not valid. The additions made u/s. 69B of the Act are, therefore, without any relevant or direct evidence to show amount of investments etc. made in the above two plots of land, sis not fully disclosed in the books of account of the appellant. In the light of these facts, the decision of the jurisdictional Ahmedabad Bench of the ITAT in the case of Shankarlal Nebhumal HUF (Supra) and ITAT, Jaipur's decision in the case of Swami Complex Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), referred in the appellant's submission dated 04-03-2011 reproduced above, become relevant.
4.5 In view of the discussion made above, and the decisions referred to therein, I delete the additions of Rs.94,99,500/- and Rs.36,50,6757- u/s, 69B of the Act, and allow the grounds of appeal no. 1,2,5 & 6.
4.6 The appellant has during the course of appellate proceedings, vide letter dated 04-03-2011 submitted that the Assessing Officer has also made reference to the valuation officer for determining the value of the land on the date of purchase, without rejecting his books of accounts, and, In this regard, has relied upon the order dated 19-10- 2009 of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sargam Cinema Vs. CIT, wherein the hon'ble Supreme Court has upheld the finding of the Tribunal that the assessing authority could net have referred the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer without the books of accounts being rejected. The appellant's submission, therefore, is that reference to valuation officer has been made without rejecting the books of accounts arid the same is, therefore, invalid. The above submission of the appellant/ at this stage has no relevance, as there is no discussion in the assessment order that the Assessing Officer has referred to the DVO the above two properties for valuation., The Assessing Officer has also not relied upon any report of the DVO for making the above two additions u/s. 69B of the Act. I, therefore, do not consider it necessary to adjudicate on this submission.
4.7 Grounds of appeal no. 3 &4 relate to addition of Rs. 98,86, 250/- by taking the value of non agricultural land of 2340 sq. mtr. (wrongly mentioned by the Assessing Officer as 2090 sq. mtr.) in which the appellant has 50% share, that is 1170 sq, mtr. The sale price of the above land as documented is Rs.1100/- per sq. mtr. The appellant has also objected to the above addition on the ground that while reference has been made by the Assessing Officer to the DVO u/s. 55A of the Act, for the valuation of the above land, he has made the addition, without waiting for his report alternately, the reference to the DVO itself is not valid. The above land was sold by the appellant as a joint owner on 10- ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 -8- 01-2008 for a total consideration of Rs.25,75,000/- (wrongly mentioned in the order as Rs.12,87,5007-), in which assessee's half share is Rs.12,87,500/-. The appellant has during the course appellate proceedings vide submission dated 04-03-2011 staled that die Assessing Officer has wrongly taken the sale consideration of the entire land at Rs.12,87,500/- instead of Rs. 25,75,000/- and the appellant's half share in that at Rs. 6,43,750/- instead of Rs.12,87,500/-. This mistake is found apparent from record. The total sale consideration of the non agricultural land of 2340 sq. mtr. at Vesu sold during the year, in which the appellant has half share, is, therefore, taken at Rs. 25,87,500/- and the appellant's share at Rs. 6,43,750/-. Similarly, the rate of the above land comes to Rs.1100/- per sq. mtr. and not Rs.616/- per sq. mtr., as mentioned in para 5 of the order, and the date of sale of the above plot of land is also taken as 10-01-2008 and not 12-01-2002 as mentioned in the above para of the order. The Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings, rejected the appellant's submission that the sale rate at Rs. 1100/- per sq. mtr. for the above plot was more than the jantri rate of Rs.105/- per sq. mtr. hence, not below the rate prescribed u/s. 50C of the Act, for the purpose of computation of capital gain, on the ground that the jantri price prevailing during the period does riot stand good in the eyes of law, as the existing; price of land in Vesu area was Rs.2500/- to Rs.3000/-per sq. mtr., and SUDA in the F.Y. 2005-06 had auctioned land in Vesu, between Rs.5000/- per sq. mtr. to Rs.13200/- per sq. mtr., which is very high compared to jantri price registered in the Government record. He, therefore, show caused the appellant as to why the sale price may not be estimated at Rs.12000/- per sq. mtr., which was the jantri price indicated b\ the Government for developed land from 01-04-2008 onwards, and, after considering the reply of the appellant, the Assessing Officer estimated the sale rate at Rs. 9000/- per sq. mtr. i.e. after giving reduction of 25% from the rate of Rs. 12000/- per sq. mtr. and computed the appellant's share in the sale proceeds of the above land at Rs.1,05,30,000/- (1170 X 9000), and, after subtracting the value shown by the appellant in his books of accounts at Rs.6,43,750/-, he determined the unaccounted sale proceeds at Rs.98,86,250/-. I find that there is an apparent mistake in the computation of above amount, as the Assessing Officer has wrongly subtracted 6,43,750/-, instead of Rs.12,87,500/-. The addition made on the above account is, therefore, excess by Rs.6,43,750/-, i.e. instead of making addition of Rs. 85,98,750/-, the Assessing Officer has made addition, of Rs. 98,86,250/-. 4.8 The issue involved in the above addition are, therefore, as under:
(i) Whether the instances of auction sale of residential plot, commercial plots, school and play ground by SUDA in the F.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07, can be taken as comparable instances for determining the sale consideration of non-
agricultural land sold by the appellant during the year. ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 -9-
(ii) Whether the jantri rate of Rs.12000/- per sq. mtr. for developed land in Vesu w.e.f. 01-04-2008 (as per Annexure-2 of assessment order) can be applied for determining the sale consideration of the property sold on 10-01-2008.
4.9 The appellant's submission on this ground of appeal can be summarized as under:
(i) The jantri rate prevailing :»n the dale of sale of the above land was Rs. 105/- Per sq. mtr., whereas the land has been sold by the, appellant @ 1100/- per sq. mtr. The Assessing Officer has taken the new jantri rate for developed land as at 01-04-
2008, as the base rate to determine the total sale consideration of the land, which issue is covered by the order dated 23-04-2.010 of the Ahmedabad Bench of the ITAT in the case of Kaushik S Reshamwala & Ors. (Supra), wherein the Tribunal has held that if the sale transaction is above the jantri price prevailing at the time of transaction, the provisions of section 50C are applicable, arid the Assessing Officer is not empowered to alter-the same.
(ii) The appellant has furnished 34 sale instances including 4 instances of sale made in the month of January to March 2008 in the Vesu area where, the sale rate per sq. mtr., is less than the sale rate of Rs.1100/- per sq. mtr., that is as per the sale deed of the land sold by the appellant. The appellant has also enclosed a copy of 'index' obtained from the office of the sub registrar of the above 34 sale instances, vide Annexure 8 to the written submission dated 04-03-2011.
(iii) The Assessing Officer has made reference u/s. 55A of the Act, for valuation of the above property to the DVO, without rejecting his books of accounts, the same is, therefore; erroneous and bad in law, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 19-10-2009 in the case of Sargam Cinema (Supra).
4.10 I find, from the discussion made in para 4 of the order that the Assessing Officer while rejecting the submission of the appellant that if jantri rate is not accepted, addition- cannot be made without the valuation officer's report u/s. 55A of the Act, has recorded, as follows.
" a reference is being made to Govt. valuer to determine the real value of land told by the assessee. AS report from Govt. valuer is pending without any prejudice to the report of the valuer,, based on the sale instances at auction held by SUDA. and jantri price made effective from 01-4-2008 becomes parameter to determine the reasonable sale price. If the rates finalized by the valuation authorities subsequent to the completion of the assessment proceedings are found to be lower than the price adopted by I.T. department, then the price indicated by valuation authorities subsequent to the completion of ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 - 10 -
the assessment proceedings are found to be lower than the price adopted by IT department, then the price indicated by valuation authorities may be substituted for calculation of undisclosed capital gain and unaccounted investment,"
It is not clear from the above discussion made by the Assessing Officer, as to whether a reference to the DVO u/s. 55A of the Act, has been made during the course of assessment proceedings or therefore, as at one point, he has recorded that a 'reference is being made' whereas at the other point he has recorded 'report from Govt. valuer is pending'. In any case, the Assessing Officer has himself recorded the reasons for taking jantri rate as base rate for determining the sale value of land, as under, "Recourse to jantri prices and market rate and auction rate of SUDA were only taken to indicate that whet ever the sale / investment on land made by the assessee at Vesu area, Surat is below the existing market rate which assessee has not disclosed in his books of a/c."
4.11 In the light of the facts discussed above as well as 34 instances of sale in. the Vesu area given by the appellant, I hold that the auction sale rates of 12 instances quoted by the Assessing Officer and annexed to the order cannot be taken as true and correct indicator for determining the sale rate of non agricultural land sold by the appellant. Further instances of auction sale rate relate to residential plots, school and play ground plots and commercial plots, whereas, the instances of sale furnished by the appellant are found more relevant for determining the sale consideration of land sold by the appellant, as the same relate to non agricultural land sold during the same period in the Vesu area. In so far as adopting the jantri rate of developed land in Vesu area as at 01-04-2008, vide Annexure-2 to the order Is concerned, the same, In the light of decision of the jurisdictional Ahmedabad Bench of the ITAT in the case of Kaushik Reshamwala (Supra) cannot be adopted as an indicator to determine the sale rate of non agricultural land sold by the appellant on 10-01-2008. In nutshell, the Assessing Officer has not brought any direct evidence on record to show that capital gain from the sale of the above land has not been fully accounted for in the books of the appellant. I, therefore, delete the addition of Rs. 98,86,250/- made on the above account. While deleting the said addition, I am not adjudicating on the issue raised, by the appellant that no reference u/s. 55A of the Act, can be made without rejecting the books of accounts, because in the case decided by the Supreme Court and relied upon by the appellant, the assessment had been made after estimate made by the valuation officer had been received. Since in the case of the appellant, the Assessing Officer has not relied upon any valuation report for determining the sale value of the land sold, the same is not subject matter of the present appeal. The grounds of appeal no.3 & 4, thus, stand allowed."
ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 - 11 -
This leaves the Revenue aggrieved.
7. We have heard both the parties and perused the case file. There is no dispute about the factual position that the Assessing Officer revised purchase and sale prices of assessee's lands in respect to his transactions executed in the relevant previous year by treating SUDA auction prices of developed land and State Government's revised jantri prices applicable from 01.04.2008. There is no quarrel that these jantri prices are not retrospectively applicable. Nor there is any case made out at Revenue's behest disputing that assessee's purchase price @ Rs.473/- is almost 4.5 times more than the jantri rate and sale price is almost 10 times thereto (supra). It has come on record that the assessee has produced 16 sale instances from December 2004 to March 2008 wherein open agricultural plots in Vesu area itself had been sold in the range of Rs.46 to 202/- per sq. mtr. Similar position appears in case of 34 sale instances including four transactions from January to March 2008 stating prices less than Rs.1100/- per sq. mtr. The Revenue fails to rebut correctness thereof. Therefore, we infer in these facts that neither the assessee understated his purchase price nor sale rate of the respective lands situated in the Vesu locality at Surat. The Revenue's endeavor seeks reliance upon auction prices of SUDA's developed plots. Apples are sought to be compared with oranges in other words. We do not agree to this argument as it is an admitted fact that neither the land purchased nor sold happens to be a developed property. The Revenue's arguments accordingly fail. Once we have rejected its twin arguments on the basis of SUDA rate and appropriate adjustment in revised jantri prices in ITA Nos.1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 (AC IT vs. Shri Haresh J. Mehta & Ors.) A.Y. 2008-09 - 12 -
applying the same with retrospective effect, assessee's other arguments in the nature of legal pleas qua application of Section 69B, Section 50C and Section 55A have been rendered infructuous. The Revenue's both substantive grounds raised in the appeal fail. Its appeal ITA No.1508/Ahd/2011 is dismissed.
8. Same order to follow in Revenue's other appeals ITA Nos.1409/Ahd/2011 involving identical issues of unaccounted investment 55A of Rs.99,68,000/- and undisclosed capital gains of Rs.98,86,250/- as well as its last appeal ITA No.1510/Ahd/2011 raising solitary substantive ground of unaccounted investment of Rs.38,06,450/-; respectively.
9. These three Revenue's appeals ITA Nos. 1508 to 1510/Ahd/2011 are dismissed.
Pronounced in the open Court on this the 06th day of November, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
(MANISH BORAD) (S. S. GODARA)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad: Dated 06/11/2015
True Copy
S.K.SINHA
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
1. राज
व / Revenue
2. आवेदक / Assessee
3. संबं धत आयकर आयु!त / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आय!
ु त- अपील / CIT (A)
5. )वभागीय ,-त-न ध, आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद /
DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. गाड3 फाइल / Guard file.
By order/आदे श से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।