Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 845 - HC - Income TaxUndisclosed income as assessable u/s 158 BC - Assessee submitted the amount was not received and waived as bad debts, accordingly should be excluded from income - Reliance on the documents seized during the search - Computation of undisclosed income of the block period - whether the plea of waiver raised by the appellant with respect to the amount as justified or it has to be added by treating it as undisclosed income, as contemplated u/s 158BC? - Tribunal confirming the addition as undisclosed income assessable under Section 158 BC - HELD THAT:- Undisclosed amount determined by the Assessing Officer has a direct nexus with the incriminating materials seized during the search. We also agree with the findings of the Tribunal that the three agreements that had been entered into by the assessee with the distributors clearly indicate that the same have nothing to do with the flop of the film at the box office or otherwise. We have also noticed that clause 4 of the agreement between the appellant / assessee and the assignee provides a default clause that in case of default in payment, the appellant is at liberty to proceed against the defaulter. Whereas, it was stated before the lower authorities that the appellant did not proceed to recover the balance amount and that, they waived the same. Tribunal, on examination of the ledger account pertaining to G.V. Films, which was seized during the search, has concluded that the amount of ₹ 35,00,000/- were received by the assessee on various dates between 23.08.1995 and 11.01.1996 and the same were duly accounted. In view of the same, the Tribunal has come to a definite conclusion that the appellant already received the entire amount from the distributors much before the release of the film and therefore the question of waiver would not arise. Such a factual finding arrived at by the Tribunal, based on the material evidence, cannot be found fault with, in the opinion of this court. Assessee filed their returns only after the conduct of inspection by the Enforcement wing officials and the materials seized disclosed the unaccounted income of ₹ 34.25 lakhs and the appellant did not pinpoint anything by supportive material to rebut the same, we find no reason to differ with the finding so rendered by the Tribunal. The judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court rendered in Srinivasa Ferro Alloys Ltd [2014 (9) TMI 390 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] relied on the side of the appellant, is factually distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, we answer the substantial question of law raised herein, against the appellant/assessee.
|