Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (5) TMI 116 - HC - Income TaxValidity of block assessment - whether the seized material did not disclose any undisclosed income? - addition on account of excess transportation charges received - Held that:- The assessee did not raise the issue of any addition of a sum of ₹ 1,59,38,774/- because there was no addition of the sum of ₹ 1,59,38,774/- or any part thereof. The assessee attempted to demonstrate the fallacy in the finding arrived at by the Assessing Officer by holding at one place that there was an undisclosed income of ₹ 2.02 crores and at another place by holding that there was an undisclosed income of ₹ 1.59 crores approximately. When the Assessing Officer had not made the addition of ₹ 1,59,38,774/-, the assessee had no occasion to challenge the same. When the assessee carried the matter to the CIT (Appeal), the latter, without anything more, could have enhanced the addition. But the CIT (Appeal) did not do so. He merely confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the subject matter of challenge before the learned Tribunal was the addition of ₹ 2.02 crores. The learned Tribunal could either have upheld the same or could have set aside the same. The learned Tribunal chose to set aside that addition. The matter should therefore have come to an end in the absence of any cross objection by the revenue. We are of the opinion that the addition of a sum was clearly in excess of jurisdiction. Therefore, the question is answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee.
|