Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1258 - KERALA HIGH COURTAdmissions made u/s 132(4) - Additions were made with respect to a Chit carried on by the assessee, the rental income, loans availed by the assessee, i. e. , and those availed from individuals as also from financial institutions - addition with respect to the "DRAWS" indicated in the note-book - adoption of the multiplier as contended by the assessee - Held that:- AO adopted '1000' as the multiplier for the draw. This is not supported by any evidence unearthed, The Draw is a distinguishable item and the assessee's version has to be accepted especially in the context of the confirmations produced before the A. O. In such circumstances, we are of the opinion that the assessee's contention that the multiplier was '100' is more probable, which also stands supported by the confirmations from the various subscribers. Assessing Officer having not obtained any other material to prove that the multiplier is '1000', the adoption of such multiplier can only be said to be a mere surmise or conjecture. We also notice that the figure shown against Draw is clearly distinguishable and a separate multiplier is also possible of easy identification. We, hence, uphold the order of the Tribunal to that extent. Now we are concerned with the multiplier contended of '10000' for individual loans and '100000' against institutional loans we notice that in the course of search the assessee was seen to have launched a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the dishonour of a cheque of ₹ 4, 00, 000/-. The contention of the assessee was that the loan was only of ₹ 14, 000/-. In such circumstances, we do not think any credence can be placed on the submission of the assessee that with respect to the individuals the multiplier to be applied is '10000' and that to the institutions '100000'. Even with respect to certain individuals, the assessee had stated on oath that the multiplier to be applied is '100000'. This has to be applied across the board to all the individuals, since there is no substantiating material produced; as confirmation from the individuals. The assessee has also no explanation as to how the multiplier can be applied differently when the figures and names are noted without any distinguishable marks. We, in the above circumstances, answer the questions of law in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee; but, however, confirm the order of the Tribunal with respect to the Chit transaction directing the adoption of the multiplier as contended by the assessee. The Assessing Officer shall re-do the assessment in accordance with the directions herein above.
|