Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 465 - AT - Income TaxUndisclosed income - Additions made the basis of seized material - jurisdiction of the AO to assess the income of the assessee under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Act challenged - Held that:- This case was earlier heard on 26.08.14 and the matter was reserved for orders. However, in the meantime, the Ld. D.R. Shri S.D. Srivastava, moved an application dated 27.08.14 contending that the date of assignment of the case written in the assessment order as 28.03.07 was a typographical mistake. In fact, case of the assessee was assigned to DCIT, CC-1, Thane on 13.03.08. The case of the partners of the assessee firm namely Shri Amritlal Hirachand Sanklesha (Mutha) and Shri Ramesh Hirachand Sanklesha (Mutha) was in fact assigned on 28.03.07. The reference mentioned on the satisfaction note is pertaining to financial year 2007-08 and even the notice to the assessee was also issued on 27.03.08. Since the Ld. A.R. for the assessee after going through the record produced by the Revenue regarding the typographical error occurred as to the date mentioned on the satisfaction note, could not controvert the plea taken by the Revenue in this respect - - Decided against the assessee. Assessment made u/s 153A - Whether no incriminating material was found during the search against the assessee? - Held that:- The assessee firm had never raised any objection that no incriminating material was found against it, rather has returned the additional income in pursuance to the notice issued to it. Under such circumstances, the assessee had no case that any incriminating material was not found against it or that the satisfaction recorded by the concerned AO was wrong or vitiated. In the absence of such a case, how can it be said that any right of the assessee has been infringed or affected by mere not mentioning the ‘section 153C’ in the body of the notice which has been duly issued as per the provisions of section 153A as prescribed therein under the provision of section 153C itself. - Decided against the assessee. Unaccounted income from money lending - Held that:- The interest of justice will be best served if the additions are reduced considering the submission of the assessee that it is not possible that the assessee had been charging same rate of interest from all the borrowers in the past. We accordingly reduce the addition made by the lower authorities on this issue to the extent of 50% of the added amount. - Decided partly in favour of the assessee. Unaccounted stock of Gold/ jewellery - Held that:- Uphold the decision of lower authorities that assessee had brought unaccounted gold jewellery into business during the previous year relevant to A.Y.2004-05 and the same was added to the income as undisclosed income of the assessee firm. Nothing was brought on record by ld. AR to deviate from the findings recorded by the lower authorities to the effect that no gold was given by Karigar to the assessee in the year 2003. No reason to interfere in the findings recorded by lower authorities to justify the alleged deposit of 2300 gms of gold by karigars. Non explanation by the assessee for excess jewellery valued at ₹ 23,70,079/-, which was added to the total income as unaccounted stock. - Decided against the assessee. Enhancement of income on the basis of torn papers - Held that:- The Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the document seized from the premises of Shri Ramesh H. Sanklesha, one of the partners of the assessee firm represents the receipt and payment arising out of the business of firm which was the unaccounted payment to the partners by the firm. Once it is held that entries so recorded was actually income of the firm, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) for enhancing the income of the assessee firm after giving benefit of telescoping in respect of similar income assessed in the assessment year 2003- 04 amounting to ₹ 7,46,544/-. The detailed finding recorded by the CIT(A) are as per material on record, therefore, do not require any interference on our part. Accordingly, we confirm the action of CIT(A) in enhancing the income of assessee firm by ₹ 10,05,568/- in the assessment year 2003-2004. - Decided against the assessee.
|