9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (6) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Tarachand and his sons. Shri Tarachand is not a partner in the firm, but his family members are partners. In the course of search certain loose papers were found and seized. These loose papers reflected the closing stock of the assessee at Rs. 1,70,771.39 as on 31-3-1986. However, in its books of account the assessee had shown the closing stock at Rs. 1,00,771.39. The explanation of the assessee for this discrepancy was found to be vague by the Assessing Officer and hence the addition of Rs. 70,000 was made. The CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition. 3. Shri Lajpat Rai, Advocate, appeared for the assessee. It was submitted by the ld. counsel that since the loose papers, on the basis of which addition was made, was found from the reside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d have perused the material on record. We reject the first argument of the ld. counsel as regards the applicability of section 132(7). This provision pertains to the assets and not to books of account or loose papers. Secondly, they are not found to be in the possession of partners of the assessee firm. The next contention that as the loose papers do not bear the signature of the assessee, they cannot be taken note of. In our opinion, the reliance of the ld. counsel on the Supreme Court decision in S.P. Gramophone Co. 's case is totally ill-founded. In that case, the assessee wanted the revenue authorities to take note of its profit and loss account and balance sheet which were unsigned. It was in this context the apex court observed that s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 132(5). However, the order under section 132(5) is only a summary order to determine the likely tax liability of the assessee and accordingly to retain the seized assets. The final income obviously has to be determined under section 143(3) of the Act. In the course of assessment proceedings under section 143(3), the Assessing Officer cannot, pre se, make addition by taking recourse to the presumptions, because they are rebuttable presumptions. If the assessee is able to rebut the presumptions to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, then no addition would be made. However, if the assessee, after having afforded an opportunity, fails to avail of the same, or, while availing the same, the evidence in rebuttal is found to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e addition is well justified and no interference is called for. It may be mentioned that none of the decisions cited by the ld. counsel is helpful to the assessee. 8. The next ground relates to the addition of Rs. 13,197 on account of alleged purchases made out of the books. This addition is also based on certain loose papers seized from the business premises of the assessee during the search. In respect of these papers also, the assessee has not brought any evidence on record to show that the said papers and the contents thereof do not belong to it. The assessee's explanation that the papers may have been dropped by some customers appears to be quite bald and without any merit. Thus, in respect of this addition also, no interference is ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
