(1.)These appeals have been instituted by the assessee against the orders of the CIT(A) for the asst. yr. 1981-82 on different grounds.
(2.)The appeals in ITA Nos. 551 552 (Cal) of 1990 were decided earlier by the Tribunal, B-Bench, Calcutta, vide order dt. 15th March, 1994 but when the assessee filed Misc. Appln. Nos. 60 61 (Cal) of 1994 in ITA Nos. 551 552 (Cal) of 1990, the orders of the Tribunal were recalled vide order in Misc. Appln. Nos. 60 61 (Cal) of 1994 in ITA Nos. 551 552 (Cal) of 1990 for the asst. yr. 1981-82 dt. 28th December, 1994. They are thus recalled appeals pending before us and the appeal in ITA No. 3912 (Cal) of 1992 is fresh one.
(3.)This is a very peculiar case and the chronological history of the case with facts in brief is that in this case a search and seizure operation took place in the residential premises of the assessee on 25th May, 1981 and amongst others a bunch of loose papers marked as BM-5 was seized vide Annexure-BM Panchnama placed on the record. The deposition of the assessee was also recorded under s. 132(4) of the Act and a copy is placed at p. 27 of the paper-book. An order under s. 132(5) placed at p. 11 of the paper-book was passed on 21st August, 1981, holding cash seized from the residence amounting to Rs. 80,000 and cash paid to Sri I. M. Dhawan amounting to Rs. 2,00,000 as concealed income. The original return showing total income at Rs. 61,750 was filed on 17th June, 1982 and the assessment under s. 143(3) was completed on 28th March, 1984 on total income of Rs. 1,31,750 including Rs. 70,000 as unexplained gift received by the minor sons of the assessee. The assessee filed an appeal against that assessment order on 11th April, 1984. During the pendency of this appeal a notice under s. 148 was issued and served on the assessee as on 27th March, 1985 and the assessment was reopened on the basis of certain vital information found in the seized documents about the assessees business activities in sanitary goods which was admitted by him under s. 132(4) and on the basis of large amount of credits in a few bank pass books in the name of the assessee and his minor sons seized by the Department. In the meantime, the assessee filed an application before the Settlement Commission on 12th September, 1985. On the other hand in response to notice under s. 148 the assessee filed return on 4th February, 1987 declaring therein the total income of Rs. 61,540 and the reassessment under s. 143(3)/147 was finalised on 30th March, 1987 on total income of Rs. 3,56,750, which included in addition to originally assessed income, a sum of Rs. 25,000 as income from undisclosed business in sanitary goods and Rs. 2,00,000 as unexplained cash paid to Sri I. M. Dhawan. The assessee filed an appeal against the reassessment on 20th May, 1987 and the CIT(A) confirmed the action and jurisdiction of the AO under s. 147 and disposed of the appeal on 24th October, 1989, on merit by setting aside the order under s. 143(3)/147, for comprehensive investigation and for fresh assessment. Fresh assessment was completed under s. 144 on total income of Rs. 3,56,750 which was also appealed against by the assessee. The Settlement Commission passed its order on 1st December, 1988. In the first appeal against the original assessment order the CIT(A) vide his order dt. 24th October, 1989, dismissed the appeal as infructuous on the ground that since the original assessment is reopened under s. 147 it does not exist. In appeal against the assessment order under s. 143(3)/147 the CIT(A) has set aside the assessment vide his order dt. 24th October, 1989, and in third appeal against fresh assessment under s. 144, the CIT(A) has confirmed the assessment vide his order dt. 14th August, 1992. The assessee has preferred appeals to the Tribunal against all these three orders of CIT(A). What emerges from the above facts is the peculiarity of this case where three appeals for the same assessment year i.e., for asst. yr. 1981-82 are preferred to and are pending before the Tribunal. We take up these appeals now one by one as follows :