This set of two appeals which are filed by Revenue relate to asst. yrs. 1978-79 and 1979-80, which are being disposed of by this combined order for t h e sake of convenience as they involve common ground. common ground raised by Revenue is that AAC was not justified in deleting income added by ITO as income from undisclosed sources for in adequate withdrawals for household expenses. assessee is HUF which carries on business in manufacture and sale of art silk cloth. He is also partner in firm styled M/s S.D.P. ITO found that withdrawals made by assessee worked out to Rs. 8062 for asst. yr. 1978-79 and Rs. 8150 for asst. yr. 1979-80. He further found that assessee was head of family consisting of himself, his wife, his brother and his family. total withdrawals made by each of members of family, as set out in details by ITO, worked out to Rs. 25,014 for asst. yr. 1978-79 and Rs. 31,766 for asst. yr. 1978-79. ITO observed that t h e total withdrawals so made were inadequate keeping in view High standard of living of assessee. Relying on fact that search was carried out under s. 132 on 27th Sept., 1974 and data collected at that time ITO held that withdrawals were not adequate. He further found that substantial payments of life insurance premiums were made by assessee towards policies of various members of family, details of which are found in para 5 of ITO s order for asst. yr. 1978-79. assessee s explanation that he was staying with his brother and that expenses were common as also fact that prices of essential commodities had declined that not find favour with ITO. assessee had also contended that Shri N was detained under COFEPOSA for part of year and therefore, expense has gone down. This contention was also not accepted. On contrary, ITO supported his conclusion by relying on decision of Tribunal for earlier years and came to conclusion that withdrawals as shown by assessee were inadequate and in this view of matter he estimated household expenses Rs. 50,000 for asst. yr. 1978-79 and Rs. 55,000 for asst. yr. 1979-80 and after apportioning expenses with brother N. K. sum of Rs. 12,493 was treated as income from undisclosed sources for asst. yr. 1978-79 and Rs. 11,617 for asst. yr. 1979-80. Being aggrieved assessee carried matter in appeal before AAC and it was contended that ITO had relied on same facts which were set out for asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78. AAC, while dealing with appeals for those years, was pleased to delete additions made, on identical facts. Therefore, AAC held that additions for year under appeal were not sustainable. He, therefore deleted said additions. Hence, these appeals by Revenue. Before us Shri Malik submitted that looking to high standard of living of assessee as discussed by ITO in his order household expenses disclosed by assessee were inadequate. assessee lived in stylish manner in posh locality and possessed various gadgets as also air conditioners, refrigerators, etc. Thus having regard to standard of living noted by ITO expenses disclosed by assessee on household accounts for both years were on low side. Shri Malik pointed out that according to decision of their Lordships of Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Vidya Sagar Oswal vs. CIT, Patiala (1976) 45 Tax 225 (P&H) not only additions for inadequate household expenses was justified but levy of penalty was also upheld by their Lordships. According to Shri Malik this decision was land mark inasmuch as it laid down proposition that when household expenses were inadequate it was open to Department to make addition as income from undisclosed sources and even levy penalty for concealment of income. Shri Patel on other hand submitted at outset that said decision kly relied upon on behalf of Shri Malik and had no application to facts of case before us. He submitted that question regarding additions for inadequate withdrawal is essentially question of fact to be decided on basis of facts and material circumstances relied upon by ITO. There was raid which had taken place on 25th Sept., 1974. Except for this circumstance which is far fetched one qua assessment year under appeal not single piece of evidence or material is brought on record to show that withdrawals were not adequate. He pointed out that telephone expenses and LIC premiums were separately debited in business book. They were not paid from sources not explained. Similarly motor car expenses were debited in business books. Even in course of raid about which reference is made earlier no material was found to substantiate conclusion that withdrawals were inadequate. On contrary for asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78 additions which were made on identical facts were deleted by AAC and Department had not preferred any appeal. Similarly household expenses at Rs. 39,740 for asst. yr. 1980-81 were also accepted by ITO. assessee had filed exhaustive written submission before AAC stating full details of expenses and how they were met by withdrawal from accounts of different members of family and AAC was satisfied with regard to explanation and was pleased to delete additions. He therefore submitted that no interference was called for in regard to decision of AAC for both years. We have considered rival submissions. We have no quarrel with broad proposition canvassed on behalf of Revenue that when household expenses are found to be inadequate or ridiculously low as compared to income earned by assessee, ITO would be justified in making as reasonable estimate of household expenses of assessee and in absence of any satisfactory explanation in regard to sources of such expenses there could be justification in making addition to disclosed income. But material point is whether there is any material to establish that household expenses as disclosed by assessee were low. Now let us look to facts of case before us. All that ITO has relied upon is incident for circumstance relating to raid which took place four years before assessments in question. Since said raid took place, ITO consistently relied on same circumstance to support additions for inadequate withdrawals. As pointed out by Shri Patel additions made in immediately preceding two years on identical facts were deleted by AAC and Revenue has not challenged matter further. That apart assessee s contention that he has recorded expenses for life insurance premium as also for telephone expenses and motor car in his books is not disputed by Revenue. Therefore, said expenses have come out of disclosed income or source. No adverse inference could be drawn in this regard. mere use of air conditioner and refrigerator without anything more does not support finding of inadequate withdrawals unless it is established that some expenditure for purchase of these assets were made during relevant previous year but same was not recorded in books. Similarly there is no evidence to show that electricity expenses which were incurred to run air conditioner were not properly accounted for. entire basis of addition is on conjectures and surmises based on event unconnected with assessment years under appeal. Therefore we see no reason to interfere with decision of AAC. Now, Shri Malik has made very important point based on decision in Oswal s case (supra). Now we examine facts in that case. It is clear that assessee concerned was leading industrialist who had disclosed household expenses of Rs. 2000 per annum as against his income of Rs. 86,029. It was found as matter of fact that assessee s explanation about receipt of Rs. 1000 was found false and that though his family consisted of himself, his wife, four sons and one daughter, none of family members bear any of household expenses though they were earning separately. It was in these circumstances that Tribunal concluded that household expenses of Rs. 2000 per annum were petty and addition was required to be made thereto. In instant case however assessee had disclosed withdrawals made from account of various members of family who had contributed to household expenses. families of two brothers are staying under one roof and there is contribution by almost each and every member of family. This material distinction cannot be overlooked and therefore decision in Oswal s case to our mind has absolutely no application to facts of case. For aforesaid reasons, therefore we agree with conclusion reached by AAC and dismiss these appeals. *** INCOME TAX OFFICER v. N.S.P.