- (1.) These three appeals have been filed against a common judgment of the learned Tribunal dt. 13.6.2003, allowing the appeals of the three assessees, and deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer, which were confirmed by the learned C.I.T.(Appeals).
(2.) The necessary facts are, that block assessment of the three assessees was made, for the period 1989-90 to 1998-99. The background facts are, that search and seizure operations were conducted on the premises of certain persons, which have been referred in the impugned order, as premises of Nabi Group , at Chittorgarh on 12.3.1998, during which certain documents were found and seized. Panchnama was prepared. Documents included an agreement of sale of the property, called Indore Coffee House at Chittorgarh, which was sold by three assessees Kanhaiyalal Gurnani, Mohanlal Gurnani and Smt. Leela Devi to Akhtar Hussain, Iqbal Hussain and Akram Hussain (Nabi Group). This agreement is said to be dated 28.2.1996, and purported to be an agreement to sale the property for a price of Rs. 18,71,001/-, while the property was sold vide three registered sale deeds for a total value of Rs. 3 lacks, i.e. for Rs. one lack, by each of the assessees. On these facts, the assessing officer made a total addition of Rs. 15,71,001/-, being the difference amount between the price shown in the registered sale deed and the agreement, said to have been recovered during search, and divided the amount between the three assessees in equal shares. This addition was confirmed, as is observed above, by the learned Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals), which was challenged in further appeal before the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal allowed the appeals, by finding, in the detailed impugned judgment, running into 53 pages, interalia, that the agreement found is not a complete document. The other two papers did not appear to form part of this agreement. Apart from that, they are not signed, and other various attending circumstances were appreciated, and noticed, by the learned Tribunal.
(3.) The appeals were admitted by this Court by framing following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the additions of Rs. 5,23,667/- made by the Assessing Officer as share of the assessee in the concealed sale consideration and the findings reached by the Tribunal in this connection are perverse ;