9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 6,69,050 along with audited balance-sheet, profit and loss account, tax audit report dated November 22, 2003. Since the survey was carried out under section 133A of the Act, the case of the appellant- assessee was selected for compulsory scrutiny by issuing notice to it under section 143(2) on May 6, 2004, however, the jurisdiction of the case was transferred to the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-2, Alwar, as the income of the appellant-assessee exceeded Rs. 5 lakhs and, there- fore, notice under section 143(2) and 143(1)(ii) along with query letter was issued to the appellant on October 27, 2005, by the said authority. The Assessing Officer, i.e., the Assistant Commissioner, Income-tax, passed an assessment order on March 22, 2006, thereby computing the income of the appellant at Rs. 7,94,420, on the ground that during the course of survey an unexplained cash to the tune of Rs. 2,95,000 and unexplained stock to the tune of Rs. 2,28,086 have been discovered and further the Assessing Officer disallowed the interest under section 36(1)(iii) to the tune of Rs. 26,833. The appellant-assessee preferred an appeal on April 28, 2006, before the Commissioner of Income-tax (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 10 days due to absence of accountant, such books could not be rejected for the entire period. Alternatively, though contrarily, it was argued that once the books of account were rejected and income of the appellant-assessee was calculated on estimated basis, non-recording of some entries in the books lost its relevance for the purpose of estimation of income. 5. Shri Anant Kasliwal, learned counsel for the appellant-assessee further contended that the Revenue authorities have seriously erred in disallowing a sum of Rs. 26,833 from out of the assessee's claim of interest merely on the ground that some of the funds available with the appellant-assessee were lent by it to its sister concern, M/s. Shubham, on interest-free basis and without considering the aspect that the same was received back in the same financial year. 6. The learned counsel in support of his arguments relied on the judg- ments of the Gujarat High Court in M. Kantilal Exports v. Asst. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 185 (Guj) ; [2010] 36 DTR Judgments 296 and the Chhattis- garh High Court in ITO v. Vijay Kumar Kesar [2010] 327 ITR 497 (Chhattisgarh) ; [2010] 36 DTR Judgments 13. 7. According to the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade a trading addition of Rs. 40,061 in the income of the assessee. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) affirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 10. The learned counsel submitted that during the course of survey, certain loose slips of sale transactions were found and yet the same were not recorded in the books of account. The appellant-assessee failed to submit any cogent explanation therefor. The Assessing Officer also noted that the appellant had given advance of Rs. 2,50,000 to its sister concern working under the name and stile of M/s. Subham Hotel on May 8, 2002, and had not charged any interest on such advance. He found from the account that the assessee had paid interest on unsecured loan and on the loans taken from the banks to the tune of Rs. 1,60,033 during the said period. He accordingly worked out interest on amount of Rs. 2,50,000 given by the appellant-assessee without interest to its sister concern, M/s. Subham Hotel, and held that the interest to that extent was incurred for non-busi- ness purpose. He, therefore, disallowed the interest at the rate of 12 per cent. per annum on such amount at Rs. 26,833. 11. All these being findings of fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... found of Rs. 14,23,250 excluding the stock of sugar at Rs.3,22,336. The stock as per the books of account, excluding sugar, was to the tune of Rs. 13,26,323 and as such the discrepancy that was found, was to the tune of Rs. 96,921. The assessee, while filing the return of income, included a sum of Rs. 87,259 but failed to give any justification for non- inclusion of the differential amount of Rs. 9,662. 14. Similarly the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had disclosed receipt of interest to the tune of Rs. 900 only, whereas he had given advance of Rs. 2,50,000 to its sister concern working in the name and style of M/s. Shubham Hotel on May 8, 2002, and yet had not charged any interest on such advance. The Assessing Officer also found from the account that the assessee had paid interest to the tune of Rs. 1,60,033 during the relevant period. He accordingly worked out the interest on the said amount of Rs. 2,50,000 given by the assessee without interest to its sister concern and held that the interest to that extent was incurred for non-business purpose ; he, therefore, disallowed the interest at the rate of 12 per cent. on such amount at Rs. 26,833. His action was c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ive any satisfactory explanation on all the issues referred to above, and could not produce any cogent evidence in support of any such explanation. Not only the Assessing Officer but also the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in this case have concurrently recorded their findings against the appellant-assessee on all the issues. Those findings in the facts of the present case, in our considered view, cannot be said to be either perverse or erroneous so as to warrant interference by this court. 18. Section 69 of the Act, inter alia, provides that where in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year, the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of the investments or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the value of the investments may be deemed to be the income of the assessee of such financial year. According to this provision, therefore, addition can be made on this count by the Assessing Officer towards the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
