Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 1660 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURTDenial of natural justice - Joint Commissioner while granting an approval u/s.153D to an order passed u/s.153A gave no opportunity to be provided to the Appellant - HELD THAT:- As in the case of 'Gopal. V. Pandit [2018 (7) TMI 51 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] in which as regards first question, we have held that in the absence of specific provision in Section 153D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the present Authority, namely, Joint Commissioner is not expected to give an opportunity of hearing to the Assessee before giving an approval to the Draft Assessment Order to be passed by the lower Authority, namely, Deputy Commissioner. Seized material corroborates the income fixed under the head “Pooja”- Whether seized material does not disclose such income from “Pooja” ?- HELD THAT:- We have held that the same does not give rise to any substantial question of law as it is a matter of estimate based on the relevant material seized during the course of search and the statement recorded of the Assessee u/s. 132[4] of the Act as to what was the income of the Assessee who was working as Priest during the relevant period. Unexplained expenditure - HELD THAT:- Margins are not recorded in the books of accounts therefore those were considered by the Assessing Officer as payment out of books. As it is apparent from these numbers written in the margin that a proper care was taken for distinguishing the amounts in thousands by putting a point [.] before the number as in the case of last number written as 0.5. Therefore the other numbers written in the margin with the dates clearly indicates the payment made by the assessee in lakhs. Therefore we do not find any error or illegality in the orders of the authorities below on this issue and confirm the addition
|