Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 2007 - AT - Income TaxAddition as peak deposit - Held that:- During the assessment proceedings enquiries were made from the bank and it was found that the introduction to the said account had been made by Smt. Prem Kumari wife of the assessee and the withdrawals and the deposits have been made by Shri Kapoor Singh and his sons Vikas and Rajiv from time to time. The Bank Manager has given in writing that accounts statement shows that most of the payments have been made to Shri Kapoor Singh and his sons. Thus Section 132 (4A) of the Act is very much attracted in the present case as the pass book was in the custody of the assessee and not that of in the custody of assessee’s sons. Thus, it is clearly established that the account of Shri Sube Singh was operated by the assessee and not by assessee’s sons. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has rightly added the said amounts in the hands of the assessee and the CIT(A) has also confirm it with proper reasoning in respect of the Assessment Year 2000-2001 and 2002- 2003. - Decided against assessee. Addition on “Kanyadan” given - piece of evidence found and seized during search that the appellant has made noting of its undisclosed income on this paper - Held that:- The assessee stated before the Investigation Officer that these entries pertain to some “Kanyadan” given by him. But during the statement at the time of search the assessee clearly stated that the expenses incurred for the marriage of his daughter was ₹ 1.25 lakhs (page no. 17 of the Paper Book filed by AR). As relates to the case law cited by the AR that of Malabar Oil Marketing Co. [2003 (9) TMI 295 - ITAT BOMBAY-F] the same is relevant as in the said case, it was held that mere notings on the loose paper without any corroborative evidence, cannot be assessed as “income” in the hands of the assessee. It further held that there being no material on record to suggest that the assessee has received any amount apart from the amounts received by it per account payee cheques. The Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) has not given any reasons or justification as to how the figures mentioned in the loose paper pertains to denomination of thousand. Thus, no case for addition on this account is made out by the Revenue. - Decided against revenue.
|