Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2010 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (3) TMI 772 - AT - Income TaxSurvey - Search and seizure - Addition - Issue of validity of notice issued u/s 153C - The assessee ultimately filed return of income under protest - The provisions of sec. 153 were differently worded and as such no such written satisfaction was required to be recorded at the time of issue of the notice - There is nothing on record to suggest that that said Shri Manharanlal Verma was independently running consultancy services on full ledged basis by keeping the concerned staff from complex of Shri Trilok Singh Dhillon - It is undisputed that the acknowledgements of excise licenses, application copies of excise licenses and copies of bank statement and register etc- were found and seized from the alleged cabin of Shri Manharanlal Verma which is part and parcel of Shri Trilok Singh Dhillon, complex only Regarding protective assessment - This manner of assessment has been upheld by the Hon*ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalji Haridas Vs ITO 1961 (7) TMI 8 - SUPREME Court- Examination of the bank account revealed huge cash transactions totaling to lakhs of rupees and in view of the financial status of these three persons, the source of these cash transaction became significant - In order to circumvent these hurdles posed by the changed procedure, Shri Trilok Singh Dhillon appeared to have devised an innovative modus operandi Regarding relief - In order to hold a person benamidar to be benamidar of another, it is necessary that the fruits of the business must flow back directly or indirectly and exclusively to the person whose funds were invested - The principle is that where the property is acquired in the name of one person but purchase price is paid by another, a presumption arises that transaction was one for benefit of person providing money - Facts and modus operandi being same, so following the same reasoning, we hold that all other assessees are also benamidar of Shri Trilok Singh Dhillon - This issue of estimation of net profit has been raised in all the above assessee's. Regarding application money - held different assessee's benamidar of Shri Trilok Singh Dhillon there is no question of allowing the application money amount in the hand of assessee, because they were merely puppets in the hands of Shri Trilok Singh Dhillon Regarding unexplained investment/unexplained deposit in banks - The stand of the assessee was that the source of the aforesaid deposit was the past savings and present business activity and it was also contended that the amount of ₹ 4,50,000/- credited on 30-07-2004 relates to amount transferred from assessee's current account which was ascertainable from the bank account - This issue of unexplained investment/ unexplained deposit in all appeals are disposed of in all appeals as indicated above Regarding cash credits - Fact being similar, so following same reasoning, deletion of addition in case of Shri Ramashre Prajapati and Harish Chand Mishra needs no interference from our side, wherein the CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee in this regard - These loan are independent of his business involvement in liquor business being benamidar of Shri Trilok Singh Dhillon - In the result, all these appeals and cross objections are disposed of
|