9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isfied, the Revenue has come up with the present Appeal. 3. Before this Court, the point taken by the Revenue is that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal below committed substantial error of law in deleting the following additions made by the Assessing Officer : 1. Addition of Rs. 1,21,720=00 made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained cash found from the business premises; 2. Addition of Rs. 1,24,416=00 made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained cash found from the residential premises; 3. Addition of Rs. 3,24,377=00 made by the Assessing Officer on the ground of excess stock found during the search action; 4. Addition of Rs. 19,47,000=00 made by the Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Addition of Rs. 19,035=00 made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained cash payment to M/s. Vinayak Trading Company. 4. The following facts are not in dispute : The assessee in the status of individual was assessed to tax and was engaged in trading/repairing of watches under the name and style of M/s. Vinayak Watch Company. There was a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act at the residential and business premises of the assessee on 3rd September 1998. The assessee, in response to the notice served on 21st December 1999 under Section 158BC of the Act, filed his return of income for the Block Year on 25th February 2000, declaring the undisclosed income of Rs. 2 lac. The Assessing Officer has finalized the block assessment, determi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact does not obviate the necessity of examining the books by the Assessing Officer, thoroughly and critically. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further pointed out that the Assessing Officer did not find any discrepancy in the books and, therefore, considering the extract of Section 158BA(3), it was clear that the transactions upto the date of search were recorded in the books on the basis of prime records, that is to say, other documents maintained in the normal course of business, and in such circumstances, there was no justification for treating the cash as unexplained if as per the books produced before the Assessing Officer the cash found tallied with the books. The additions were thus deleted. 7. Being dissatisfied, the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Tribunal, they are precluded from taking such point before this Court. Even the above point strenuously argued by Mrs. Bhatt is not reflected in the memorandum of appeal presented before this Court.
9. We, therefore, find no reason to entertain such a question at this stage within the narrow scope of Section 260A of the Act. This Appeal is, thus, devoid of any substance and is consequently dismissed.
10. Since the subject matter of the next appeal being Tax Appeal No. 40 of 2011 is similar to the present one with only a difference that in this case the assessee is the wife of the assessee in the earlier case and the addition was made on the selfsame ground, we dismiss this Appeal also on the same ground as recorded above. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
