Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2013 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 125 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURTSearch U/s 132 (1) - Block assessment U/s 158BC - Regarding understatement of cost of renovation of residence - Held that:- An addition based on pure estimation cannot be made in block assessment proceedings and as such the assessee succeeds on these grounds. Unexplained and unsecured loans - Held that:- These unsecured loans have already been declared in the regular returns We find no error in the order of the Tribunal observing that accretion to the capital accounts stood disclosed and was not unearthed during the course of the search and, therefore, it could be subject matter of regular assessment and not the block assessment. Undisclosed investment - Held that:- The ITAT observed that documentary evidence was to be given more credence as compared to the statement given without having the benefit of relying on the documentary evidence. This is again a matter of appreciation of evidence. Addition under the realm of suspicion - Held that:- Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the addition was based on the documents found in the residence of the assessee. However, the said document No.90 was examined by the ITAT and found to be ‘dumb document’. The addition was, thus, rightly deleted. No question of law arises. Deleting the addition in the absence of any evidence - Held that:- A finding of fact is recorded to the effect that the assessee had already considered the income earned on this account in the Commission Income Statement. The ITAT has recorded the finding of fact that assessee had earned only commission income on the transaction and, therefore, there could not have been any such addition. Estimating the commission - Held that:- we find that addition was made by the Assessing Officer estimating 4% commission on every deal through the assessee. The ITAT found this to be on very high side and reduced it to 2%. Cogent reasons are given in para 15.4 of the orders passed by the ITAT. Deleting the addition on account of undisclosed income based on documentary evidence - Held that:- A finding of fact is arrived at that there is no undisclosed income. The ITAT has discussed the matter in detail and in right perspective. Deleting the addition on account of acquisition of plot in the name of assessee’s wife - Held that:- we find that plot was purchased by the assessee’s wife. This income was added to the assessee’s account only on the ground that assessee’s wife did not have any source of income. Rs.26,000/- is hardly an amount. This can be the savings of the housewife also. No question of law arises here as well. Deletion of Rs.2,28,000 -Held that:- The Tribunal found that it was based on Document No.10 which was a sale transaction of Rs.2,28,000/-. The ITAT, on the basis of evidence, found that the assessee was only an agent and was only earning commission and he had himself not entered into any sale agreement. The ITAT had, therefore, modified the order by directing that commission of 2% on Rs.2,28,000/- be added. Again, it is not a question of law. - Decided against the revenue.
|