TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 614X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... investment in shares and debentures - insofar as the assessee is concerned, he had explained the source and his explanation was accepted, viz., shares and securities found from the residence in the form of Shri Mitesh Patel and Smt. Jyotikaben Patel. Once this aspect is accepted, there could not be any addition in the income of the assessee. If further investigation was required for the aforesaid correlation, i.e., in case of Shri Mitesh Patel and Smt. Jyotikaben Patel, that aspect could not have been remitted back to the Assessing Officer for assessment while considering the assessment of the assessee. Peak credit - The Assessing Officer had made this addition on the basis of the diary seized from the premises of the assessee. While comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect thereof, no seizure was made. Thereafter, notice under section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act ('the Act' for brevity) was served upon the assessee and block assessment was made and various additions were made. Few of these additions were deleted by the CIT(A) and some more additions were deleted by the Tribunal. Some of the additions are sustained till the level of the Tribunal, against which no appeals are preferred by the assessee. In these appeals which pertain to block assessment period 1-4-1989 to 18-11-1999, the Revenue has proposed to raise the following questions of law: "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, Ld. ITAT has erred in confirming the order of the CIT(A) in admitting fresh evidence u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... far as cash is concerned, the assessee again produced the bank statement of M/s. Jagdamba Tobacco Co. (which firm belongs to the assessee). The CIT (A) called for the remand report from the Assessing Officer. Thereafter, he considered the question as to whether the fresh evidence is to be admitted under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Act. Observing that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to produce this evidence, the fresh evidence was admitted by the CIT(A) and on the basis of the aforesaid evidence, he recorded the finding of fact that the assessee had successfully accounted for the jewellery and cash, and deleted the same. 5. The Tribunal has affirmed the aforesaid order of the CIT(A). The Revenue in these appeals has not ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this manner, source of making the aforesaid investments were explained. The CIT(A) sent the matter to DDIT (Investigation)-I, Baroda, who submitted the detailed report after carrying out the investigation. Before him, the assessee had produced Shri Mitesh Patel and Smt. Jyotikaben Patel, who gave the statement on oath stating that the share certificates in question were in their respective names and these investments were made by them out of their funds. On the basis of this investigation, DDIT (Investigation)-I, Baroda concluded that the assessee satisfactorily furnished the sources of the said investments. At the same time, he also observed that the said two persons, viz. Shri Mitesh Patel and Ms. Jyotikaben Patel had not correlated the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sly, the Assessing Officer added a sum of Rs. 7,34,480 to the peak credit as appearing on 24-11-1995. The Tribunal had sustained the addition of Rs. 7,34,480, but deleted the addition of Rs. 5,31,170 on the ground that the addition of both the excess outgo as peak credits cannot be sustained in view of the fact that when computation of peak credit, the outgo would also be considered in the peak credit calculated on the continuous inflow and outflow of the funds, only once addition is called for. On this basis, higher of the two is sustained. This approach of the Tribunal is again without blemish. 12. We, thus, find that no question of law arises, these appeals are accordingly dismissed. ITA No. 1366 of 2009 ITA No. 1367 of 2009 13. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n converted into a search. Thus, what is noticed is that in the course of survey, the excess stock had been found and consequently in view of the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of GMS Technologies referred to supra, where it has been held that in the block assessment, material found during the survey under section 133A can be used only if it has some relation with the material seized during the search, otherwise not, as also the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of GK Senniappan referred to supra wherein it has been held that such other material or information as are available with the Assessing Officer do not include the material gathered during the survey proceedings under section 133A, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
