TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orting material is found. We, therefore, under the given facts and circumstances of the case and also the ratio laid down in Radhasoami Satsang [ 1991 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] find no inconsistency in the finding of the ld. CIT(Appeals) deleting the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer wrongly adopting the figure of unaccounted assets in place of the unaccounted capital offered by the assessee in the return of income filed under section 153A of the Act. Grounds No. 1 to 3 raised by the Revenue are dismissed. - I.T.A. No. 167/PAT/2019 - - - Dated:- 29-8-2022 - Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member For the Appellant Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, CIT, For the Respondent Shri Nishant Mai t in, C.A. ORDER Per Manish Borad, Accountant Member:- This appeal at the instance of Revenue for assessment year 2013-14 is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna dated 28.03.2019, which is arising out of the assessment order under section 153A/143(3) of the Act on 23.12.2016 framed by Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Patna. 2. The Revenue has raised the follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contended that it is following the consistent system of accounting for calculating the unaccounted income for A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2015-16 and has offered the unaccounted capital as undisclosed income. However, the ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied and he after giving the benefit of unaccounted income declared by the assessee at Rs.3,08,800/- made the addition for the remaining amount of Rs.3,47,53,664/- i.e. the value of unaccounted assets and income assessed at Rs.3,73,96,724/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and succeeded. 4. The ld. CIT(Appeals) found merit in the contentions made by the assessee holding that there is no discretion available with the Department to rely upon a part of the document favourable to it and plead for rejection of the other part, which is not favourable to it or in respect of which no supporting material is found. The ld. CIT(Appeals) further held that the ld. Assessing Officer has not rebutted that the undisclosed assets, liabilities and capital shown in the seized balance sheet do not belong to the appellant and since the assessee has already declared a sum of Rs.3,08,800/- for the relevant assessment year, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e have heard the rival contentions and perused the relevant material placed before us. The Revenue is aggrieved with the finding of ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.3,47,53,664/- made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of undisclosed income. We observe that the assessee-company was subjected to search and various incriminating material were found. Based on the incriminating material, the assessee filed details by working out the disclosure by calculating unaccounted assets, unaccounted liability, unaccounted sales, unaccounted capital and thereafter calculated the cumulative value and offered unaccounted capital after adjusting disclosure upto the previous year thereby offering undisclosed income at Rs.16,13,645/-, Rs.3,08,800/- and Rs.53,49,618/- for A.Y. 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. There is no dispute before us at the end of revenue for A.Ys. 2012-13 and 2014-15. The dispute pertains to A.Y. 2013-14, wherein the ld. Assessing Officer has adopted the value of unaccounted assets at Rs.3,50,62,464/- liable to be taxed as unaccounted income. The assessee challenged the action of the ld. Assessing Officer stating that the assessee has adopted the unaccounted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t after segregating the unaccounted portion it offered additional income for A.Y.2012-13 to 2015-16 based on unaccounted capital and the AO accepted the same for A.Y.2009-10 to A. 7.2012-13 and A.Y.2015-16. However for the assessment year under appeal, the AO adopted a different approach by taking into consideration the highest of unaccounted assets, unaccounted capital, unaccounted liability and unaccounted net profit. The appellant further brought to the notice that the undisclosed liability of Rs 3,50,55,906/- was pertaining to F.Y.2013-14 relevant to A.Y.2014-15 and therefore taxing the same as undisclosed liability for assessment year 2013-14 is also a fallacy beyond correction. Inspite of the same the appellant submitted that it has (made disclosure of Rs.3,08,800/- as a matter of abundant precaution and suffered tax and interest thereon. The other main contention of the appellant is that the AO has accepted the amount of undisclosed capital computed by the appellant in other group companies in search proceedings and thus the AO cannot substitute principle of taxing the difference of unaccounted liabilities ignoring the declaration without any cogent reason and taking conflic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /142 ITD 394 (Kol. - Trib.); CIT v. D.D. Gears Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 562/211 Taxman 8 (Delhi)(Mag.), it has been held that a seized/impounded document should be read as a whole. Further, under section 292C presumption is available to the Department in respect of any books of account, other documents, money, bullions, jewellery or other valuable article or thing if found in the possession or control of any person in the course of search u/s 132 or survey u/s 133A, in any proceedings under this Act. This section states as under:- 292C. Where any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of search under section 132, it may, in any proceeding under this Act, be presumed - (i)that such books of account other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing belong or belongs to such person; (ii) that the contents of such books of account and other documents are true; and (iii) that the signature and every other part of such books of account and other documents which purport to be in the handwriting of any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Un accounted income High of column B, D F Disclosure for the AY on account of undisclosed capital (after adjusting disclosure upto previous year) A B C D E F F G H 2012-13 1613645 1613645 1613645 1613645 1613645 Cumulative 1613645 1613645 1613645 1613645 1613645 1613645 2013-14 35062464 308800 35055906 6558 12352028 308801 153062 308801 Cumulative 36676109 1922445 35055906 1620203 12352028 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ci ted above, Hon ble Supreme Court has mandated the need for consistency and certainty and in case of departure from settled position, strong and compelling reason needs to be spelt out. In the instant case, we find that the ld. Assessing Officer has not raised any doubt on various figures shown for undisclosed and unaccounted assets/liabilities/capital/sales or the method of computation of undisclosed income. It is judicially well settled that when a document is found during the course of search, it has to be relied upon in entirety and there is no discretion available with the assessee or the Department to rely upon a part of the document favourable to it and plead for rejection of the other part which is not favourable to it, or in respect of which no supporting material is found. 13. We, therefore, under the given facts and circumstances of the case and also the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court as referred hereinabove, find no inconsistency in the finding of the ld. CIT(Appeals) deleting the addition of Rs.3,47,53,664/- made by the ld. Assessing Officer wrongly adopting the figure of unaccounted assets in place of the unaccounted capital offered by the assessee in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
