Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 1562 - AT - Income TaxAssessment u/s 153A - Held that:- Admittedly, the assessee has not been able to show as to where he has disclosed the interest income received on the loans admitted by him to be given to M/s.Kangaroo Impex and Kangaroo Fabrics. This being so, we are of the view that the addition representing the interest in respect of loans given by the assessee to M/s.Kangaroo Impex and Kangaroo Fabrics has been rightly added. Difference in returned income for which the D.R brought our attention to para-8 at page-28 of the assessment order. As a submission that originally, the assessee had filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year declaring an income of ₹ 34,24,530/- on 28.08.2010. Subsedquently, when the return was filed in response to the notice issued u/s.153A, the return filed on 29.06.2016 showed an income of ₹ 14,00,740/-. Thus, the assessee had under-stated his income to the tune of ₹ 20,23,790/-, which has been added by AO and confirmed by CIT(A). We have considered the submissions of the D.R and perused the materials available on record. It is true that the assessee is entitled to disclose the lower income in the subsequent return filed, if he is able to substantiate with reasons as to why he disclosed the lower income. In the present case, the assessee has not given any explanation as to why he is disclosing lower income in the return filed in response to notice issued u/s.153A when compared to the return originally filed by him. This being so, the addition representing the difference between the return originally filed and the return filed in response to the notice u/s.153A of the Act stands confirmed. Undisclosed investment - Held that:- A perusal of the assessment order, as also the reply filed by the assessee extract therein, clearly shows that the transactions have been accepted by the assessee and in fact supported by the agreements. The settlement of the creditors is supported by the cash receipts found in the course of search. This has also not been disputed by the assessee. However, the assessee has been unable to show how or from where he has generated the funds to settle these creditors of M/s.Mars Export, the source for the same and whether taxes have been paid on the same, are also not shown. This being so, we find no reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) or the AO on this issue and the same stands confirmed. Unaccounted investment in Kerala - Held that:- The assessee has in response to the same, claims to have taken possession of three of her properties in Kerala, though the assessee claims the possession has not been received by the assessee. The fact remains that the registration of the same has been done in the name of the assessee. The assessee having got the property registered in his name, it is for the assessee to explain how he paid this amount or how he sourced the money for the purchase of the said property. If the property were in the name of a company, then admittedly it could have been said to have been towards the settlement of the embezzlement. Here the property having been registered in the name of assessee as an individual and the embezzlement have been claimed as loss in the hands of the company, we are of the view that the addition has been rightly made in the hands of the assessee.
|