- (1.) THIS order shall dispose of the cross-appeals filed by the two different assessees and two appeals by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A), Bhatinda, dt. 7th March, 2001, for the asst. yr. 1998-99 mentioned above, as the issues are common in all the cases of both the assessees.
(2.) We have heard the learned representatives of both the parties and gone through the observations of the authorities below and details submitted in the paper book. For the sake of convenience, we take up. ITA Nos. 310/Asr/2001 and 372/Asr/2001 for the purpose of disposal of all the appeals.
(3.) ITA Nos. 310/Asr/2001 (assessee's appeal) and 372/Asr/2001 (Departmental appeal): The first ground in assessee's appeal reads as under : "That the learned CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed an addition of Rs. 3,00,000 under Section 69 as unexplained investment peak amount in spite of the fact that during the survey under Section 133A the assessee offered an addition at Rs. 4,00,000 for the asst. yr. 1998-99 and the offer was on clear understanding that no further adverse inference will be drawn at the time of assessment in respect of the documents inspected and prepared at the time of survey. So there is a breach of trust. So no cognisance of these papers be taken and addition out of peak amount unexplained investment amount Rs. 3,00,000 be deleted." 4.1 The Revenue has also taken only ground, which reads as under : "On the facts and in the circumstances, in the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,00,000 on account of unexplained peak investment made under Section 69 of the IT Act, 1961, made by the AO.";