2004 (8) TMI 45 - HC - Income Tax

Addition on account of unexplained cash AO cannot be permitted to adopt the pick-and-choose policy and make the addition ignoring the document which was seized from the possession of the assessee and which clearly reflected the cash in hand. Even the Assessing Officer has not brought on record any iota of evidence which may prove that this amount had already been spent by the assessee by the time the search was conducted at the premises of the assessee. Even no document/books were found at the time of search which may prove the outflow of the said amount available with the assessee - onus was on the Revenue to prove that the cash was not available with the assessee. The Revenue has not discharged its burden of proof in this case. Thus we hold that the Assessing Officer was not justified in making the impugned addition

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against deletion of addition made by Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash seized during search under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana involved an appeal against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench "B", Chandigarh, regarding the deletion of an addition of Rs. 14.20 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash seized during a search conducted under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee claimed that the source of the cash was from the cash in hand available with him, supported by seized documents showing a cash in hand balance of Rs. 49,05,541 as on the date of search. The Tribunal, after reviewing the seized material, concluded that the assessee had sufficient cash in hand to cover the amount seized, as evidenced by the seized document A-35. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assessing Officer failed to provide any evidence that the amount had been spent by the assessee or demonstrate the absence of the cash in hand. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer was unjustified in making the addition and directed the deletion of Rs. 14.20 lakhs.

The High Court, upon examining the findings of the Tribunal, observed that the conclusions were based on a thorough evaluation of the evidence without any identified flaws. The Court further determined that there was no substantial question of law arising from the Tribunal's order that warranted intervention. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's decision to delete the addition of Rs. 14.20 lakhs.