TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estimating the income of the assessee from jewellery business for various years - the AO did not give any reduction for the income returned in the regular returns - Tribunal held that the additions made however took note of the materials gathered and hence were to be sustained - thus, the Tribunal directed the AO to exclude the income of Rs.1,05,528/- and Rs.89,702/- returned by the assessee in the returns filed for 2000-01 and 2001-02 while confirming the addition. CIT(A) was justified in taking the view that the excess stock found at the time of search could be considered for assessment only in the assessment years relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted – the Tribunal directed the AO to ensure that the amount w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the returns and the assessee admitted additional amount from jewellery business as well as from finance business. It is stated that a sum of Rs.95,48,810/- was admitted by the assessee in the return filed for the assessment year 2006-07 and a sum of Rs.17,24,705/-, Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.3,00,000/- were also admitted by the assessee in the return for assessment year 2006-07. Apart from that, the assessee admitted a sum of Rs.2,74,000/- from the finance business and Rs.76,42,159/- against Rokas . In respect of the return for the assessment year 2000-01, the aggregate of the admitted amount came to Rs.74,45,523/-. 3. In the course of search, books of accounts covering the period 09.11.1999 to 27.10.2000, 28.10.2000 to 27.11.2001, it was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be shown in assessment year 2005-06 itself; thus, additions were made under various heads in the assessments completed under Section 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 based on materials. 4. The assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who, viewed that as far as Rs.74,45,523/- made as addition for investment in Sahukhari Byaj business was concerned, it represented only opening balance; there was nothing to show that it represented investment of the assessee during the relevant previous year; that the statement recorded on 29.09.2005 were relied on for the purpose of making additions; as regards the undisclosed income from jewellery business, the same was based on the statement rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had shown income only from jewellery business in the returns filed prior to the search; it was admitted that the assessee had shown the surplus stock found at the time of search on 03.08.2005 exceeding Rs.95,00,000/-; thus, the admitted position was that income from his money lending business, was ever disclosed by the assessee. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal pointed out that the assessee admitted that he was running a finance business for three decades and the same were not disclosed in the regular returns filed; in the circumstances, the admission of an amount of RS.2,03,15,674/- made by the assessee in various returns filed by him after the search including the return for assessment year 2006-07, which year was not in appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer for interest earned by the assessee in such business for various years merited assessment. To that extent, the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was set aside. 7. As regards the jewellery business, admittedly, a cash book was found at the time of search and seized. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal referred to the statement recorded from the assessee and held that there was sufficient evidence found at the time of search to show that assessee was having substantial gold and silver jewellery business apart from what was returned by the assessee in books of accounts and there was surplus stock of more than Rs.95 lakhs and odd and the assessee was unable to establish that admission made by him at the ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) deleting the additions. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to ensure that the amount was included in the income of the assessee in the assessment for the assessment year 2006-07. Aggrieved by this, the assessee has preferred these appeals. 9. The narration of facts in the preceding paragraphs would clearly point out that the issue raised in the Tax Case (Appeal) seeking admission is purely question of fact. The substantial question of law raised before this Court seeking admission makes no secret about that too. Thus, having gone through the order of the Assessing Officer, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, we are convinced that there being no factual error ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
