Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (8) TMI 713 - AT - Income TaxValidity of assessment u/s 153C - assumption of jurisdiction by Ld.AO under section 153C along with additions made in respective years - HELD THAT:- This issue has been decided by this Tribunal in case of Sh.P. Vittalnath Ready [2020 (3) TMI 572 - ITAT BANGALORE] upholding the validity of proceedings under section 153C and held upholding the validity of proceedings under section 153C. In both these cases are identical arising out of the same search conducted on the group, we do not find any reason to deviate from the above findings. We also note that Ld.CIT(A) held that materials found belonging to assessee was found during course of search, from searched premises, and therefore, notice issued under section 153C of the Act is valid. - Decided against assessee. Addition of estimation of business Income - HELD THAT:- For A.Y:2013-14 We note that this issue has been dealt with by this Tribunal while deciding this issue observed that for assessment year 2013-14, time period for issuing notice under section 143 (2) expired before the date of search and that the assessment had not abated. As AR submitted that issue is identical. It is also been alleged by Ld. ar that no incriminating material was found during search relating to assessment year 2013-14, we therefore direct Ld.AO to verify the same and consider the claim of assessee. In the event it is found that time period for issuance of notice under section 143 (2) stood expired, and that no incriminating materials were found, no addition could be made under section 153C. Estimation of income - Tribunal partly allowed by limiting the estimation to 8% of gross receipts - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2020 (3) TMI 572 - ITAT BANGALORE] on careful consideration of facts and taking a reasonable approach, it would be met end of justice, if the profit rate were applied to 8% being equal to presumptive rate under section 44AD of gross receipts as against estimation @ 8.5% by Ld. CIT (A). The AG is, therefore, directed to recalculate the addition of business income by adopting 8% of gross receipts. This ground of appeal is therefore, partly allowed. Addition being 1/3rd of cash seized at the time of search - HELD THAT:- As decided in [2020 (3) TMI 572 - ITAT BANGALORE] assessee has been showing substantial income over the years and ate of business requires holding cash in hand for making weekly payments to pourakarmikas, diesel etc. Considering these facts, it can be assumed that cash was available out of known sources, which can be considered as explainable out of cash withdrawals made prior a week of search date. Therefore, we are of the view the AO was not justified in making this addition, hence, the addition is directed to be deleted. Addition being 1/3rd of gold seized at the time of search - HELD THAT:- As decided in [2020 (3) TMI 572 - ITAT BANGALORE] no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee by treating 1/3rd of seized jewellery in his hand as jewellery was belonging to entire family members. Therefore, if at all if any addition to be made it is to be equally divided among family members. Further, the assessee has only claimed jewellery of 261 grams as belonging to him, which has been reflected in balance sheet as on 31.03.2011 hence, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. Further, considering the CBDT Circular which provides jewellery holding by female member and male members and children in particular quantity as not be served meaning thereby as explained, we are of the considered opinion that no addition can be sustained on this account. Accordingly, 1/3rd addition made in the case of the assessee on account of jewellery is deleted.
|