Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2011 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (1) TMI 156 - AT - Income TaxSearch and Seizure - Addition of unexplained cash deposits in the bank Rs. 6,20,000 and unexplained expenditure on marriage Rs. 1,50,665 - Penalty thereof - Decision of the full Bench of the High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT v. Rampur Engineering Co. Ltd. (2008 -TMI - 31782 - HIGH COURT DELHI) - recording a specific satisfaction - It was explained that the handwriting in the diary was of his father and that was in respect of the estimate of marriage expenditure of his two sisters. It was seen by the Assessing Officer on page 77 that the amount of Rs. 7,67,500 was written. It appears that as noted by the Assessing Officer that the assessee could explain the expenditure to the extent of Rs. 6,07,835. The assessee contended that the figures written by his father were estimation and not the actual expenditure but actual expenditure was Rs. 6,10,833 only. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee and made the addition of Rs. 1,50,665 and also initiated the penalty proceedings. Held that: - Admittedly, the assessee explained to the extent of Rs. 6,10,833 and that has been accepted by the Assessing Officer also. So far as the explanation of the difference of Rs. 1,56,665 is concerned, the same is not accepted by the Assessing Officer that the figure of Rs. 7,61,500 is only estimation. On the perusal of the assessment order as well as the appellate order, we find that without examining the father of the assessee the Assessing Officer has straight way made the addition. Before rejecting the explanation of the assessee’s, the Assessing Officer should have at least recorded the statement of his father - Penalty deleted.
|