K.S.JHAVERI,J. - (1.) In all these appeals identical questions of law and facts are involved and as they relate to the same assessee, they are heard together and decided by this common judgment.
(2.) By way of these appeals, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby Tribunal after considering the additional evidence which was produced by the assessee under Rule 29 has allowed the appeal of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the department.
(3.) This court while admitting the appeals on 3.12.2012 (145/2012, 146/2012, 147/2012, 148/2012 & 149/2012) framed following common substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the tribunal was justified and right in law in deleting the additions under section 69 of the Act on the basis of new evidences placed on record before the original and first appellate authority makes the orders perverse and contrary to Rule 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963? (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case Tribunal was right in setting aside the addition made under section 69 by shifting the burden on the department inspite of the fact that incriminating documents, statements under section 131 were enough to justify unexplained investment and further no satisfactory answer were furnished by the respondents? (iii) Whether, the order passed by Tribunal is perverse and violative of principles of natural justice as passed on the basis of new evidences which were after thought and placed on record before original authority and the first appellate authority? ";