TMI Blog1979 (7) TMI 118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red in deleting the addition of Rs. 17,150 on the basis of new evidence, even though the assessee had shifted his stands for several times. The assessee is a partnership firm. It appears that there was a search at the premises of the assessee on 3rd Feb., 1977 and cash of Rs. 17,150 was found. On the same day, the partner of the assessee explained that the amounts came from four parties viz., Mans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the amount under consideration was not quite satisfactorily explained and so he assessed the same as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. 3. The assessee appealed to the AAC and urged that the explanation given before the ITO should have been accepted as satisfactory. It was explained that the summons issued to the four parties could not be complied with because of difficulties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two before the search. He was aware that the books of accounts of M/s. Ramanlal sons were not produced before the ITO. He therefore, allowed the said books to be examined by the ITO before he himself went through them. As he was satisfied that the cash under consideration did not belong to the assessee but actually belonged to the four relatives who explained their sources satisfactorily, he del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee could not produce these books of accounts before the ITO and it was nothing new. The assessee could not produce these books of accounts before the ITO due to lack of adequate opportunity and so they were produced before the AAC to substantiate the earlier explanation. 5. We have considered the contentions of both the parties as well as the facts on record. We find that the AAC has actual ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on them we do not see any merit in the ground taken in this appeal. Coming to the explanation itself, we find that the assessee has been explaining consistently that the amounts did not belong to him but belonged to four relatives who withdrew the amount from the books of their commission agents. The reference to the two trusts at some later stage appears to be a result of some misunderstanding. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
