Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2015 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (3) TMI 544 - HC - Income TaxAddition pertaining to the profit - unaccounted sales - addition made on the basis of diary found found from the almirah of Shri Dinesh Kumar, disgruntled employee - A.O. estimated income by applying n.p. @12% restricted to @ 6.5% by ITAT - Held that:- key of the almirah was provided at the time of search by Sri Rakesh Goyal and the same was seized. Later, the almirah was opened and incriminating material was found therein. The entry made in the seized document was already reflected in the books of account. The said slip can be treated as 'Yaaddast Parcha' i.e. memory slip. There was no sale out side the books so, there was no occasion to estimate the turnover or n.p., hence, the Tribunal has rightly applied the n.p. rate @ 6.5% which was accepted by the Department in the earlier years and the same appears reasonable in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Moreover, estimation of n.p. rate is a question of fact, which was rightly decided by the Tribunal, being a final fact finding authority. - Decided against revenue. Unexplained deposit on various dates in the current account No.4515 in the Oriental Bank of Commerce - Tribunal deleted the addition by observing that the said entry pertaining to the deposit were duly reflected in the books of account - Held that:- The books of account were seized during the course of search and entries were duly reflected at that time. The entries were also reflected in the excise record pertaining to the sale in-cash and the availability of cash with the assessee on the date of cash deposit in the bank. When it is so, then we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along-with the reasons mentioned therein. - Decided in favour of assessee. Unexplained deposit in the form of bid money - Held that:- addition of ₹ 4 lacs was made by the A.O. pertaining to the payment through Shri Umesh Gupta. The Tribunal has confirmed the addition of ₹ 4 lacs. When it is so, then there is no occasion for the department to have any grievance by taking this ground in the appeal. The ground was decided by the Tribunal in favour of the Department and it shows that the substantial questions of law have been framed in a casual manner by the department. Therefore, this question neither adjudicated nor any answer is provided. - Decided against assessee. Unexplained investment in Saharanpur Associates u/s 69 - Tribunal given the entire relief to the assessee - Held that:- Neither the copies of the documents on which basis the addition was made for ₹ 15,25,000/- confronted to the assessee nor any other material was brought on record, which will justify the addition. So, no adverse inference can be drawn with regard to entry of ₹ 15,25,000/- wrongly shown pertaining to the assessee. It is a finding of fact that no name of the assessee was mentioned in the documents on which basis the addition was made. Moreover, it is a question of fact and in the absence of material evidence, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order and the same is hereby sustained along-with the reasons mentioned here - Decided against revenue. Capital gain on sale of share - Tribunal deleted the addition holding that the capital gain arising out of sale of share was duly shown during the year 1992-93, while filing regular return - Held that:- when the capital gain on sale of share was duly shown in the assessment year 1992-93, then there is no question to make addition, hence the order passed by the Tribunal is hereby sustained along-with the reasons mentioned herein. - Decided against revenue. Addition on bogus declaration in VDIS in the name of assessee's wife namely Smt. Parul Goyal - Held that:- wife of the assessee namely Smt. Parul Goyal had availed the benefit of VDIS Scheme, 1997 and disclosed jewellery of ₹ 18,57,384/-. The A.O. observed that the declaration of VDIS was not genuine. But the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal held that the VDIS declared in the name of the wife of the assessee was duly accepted by the department. When it is so, then there is no question for making the addition again. When the amount was bogus in the VDIS then there is no occasion to make any addition, specially when declaration was accepted by the Department. - Decided against revenue. Investment and income from the money lending business - addition on the basis of loose papers marked as pages 22 and 25 found during the course of search - Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s order to delete the addition by observing that the said papers were deaf and dumb documents as no details were mentioned except amount and also no name was mentioned - Held that:- As the Tribunal observed that these documents are simple deaf and dumb documents, which cannot be considered for making any addition, specially, when no incriminating evidence was produced. When it is so, then we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal and the same is hereby sustained along-with the reasons mentioned herein. - Decided against revenue. Addition on account of diversion of income in the name of wife of the assessee - grant of relief - Held that:- y considering the rival submission, we are of the opinion that the assessee and Smt. Payal Goyal are the husband and wife in the bedroom, but for the purpose of income tax they are separate and they have filed their separate return since long, which were accepted by the department. When it is so, then there is no justification to make addition. - Decided against revenue.
|