Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (2) TMI 235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ure or allurement. And quite apart from such statement dated 19.1.06, at the time of search, the assessee had made yet another confessional statement on 28th March 2006. He had never referred to such a statement in his retraction. He did not offer any explanation why quite apart from the statement made at the time of search operation, he had two months later repeated his offer. The authorities have further recorded that both the statements were made in presence of the Chartered Accountant of the assessee. In addition to such circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the appellant was not maintaining personal books of accounts. Revenue authorities and the Tribunal on the basis of evidence on record came to the conclusion that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g such additional income to tax. The Assessing Officer, therefore, framed assessment and computed the total income of the assessee at Rs.50.36 lacs (rounded off) after making addition of Rs.50 lacs towards investment in the bungalow. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal. CIT (Appeals) confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer. In the said appellate order, he recorded as under : 3.2 I have carefully considered the contentions of the learned counsel as well as gone through the records. The appellant had disclosed Rs.50 lakhs as undeclared income in his statement recorded u/s 132(4) initially recorded on 19.01.2006 on account or renovation of Nistha Bungalow stated to be constructed in July 1999 in its furniture and fixtures .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to be constructed in July 1999. However, the appellant still maintains that there was undisclosed investment to the extent of Rs.5 lakhs which itself is evident that there was not true and full discloser of the investment in the renovation, furniture and fixtures. Hence, the contentions of learned counsel cannot be acceded to which are hereby rejected. Keeping in view of above facts and circumstances of the case, no interference is called for in the additions made in the present case. Hence, the first ground of appeal is hereby dismissed. 4. The assessee carried the matter in further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order, confirmed the view of the CIT (Appeals), making following observations : The retract .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tions. Counsel further submitted that the Tribunal committed various factual errors, that the retraction of the statement was made after nine months and not after 19 months and that reconciliation of the expenditure was produced before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment. It was submitted that merely on the basis of the admission recorded at the time of search, additions could not have been made. 7. From the record, however, we notice that not only that the initial confessional statement made by the assessee on 19.1.2006 was not retracted for months together, in between also he made one such similar statement. In his statement dated 19.1.2006, he stated as under : After taking into consideration the documents found and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , the assessee had made yet another confessional statement on 28th March 2006. He had never referred to such a statement in his retraction. He did not offer any explanation why quite apart from the statement made at the time of search operation, he had two months later repeated his offer. The authorities have further recorded that both the statements were made in presence of the Chartered Accountant of the assessee. In addition to such circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the appellant was not maintaining personal books of accounts. The assessee s contention was that source of investment in furniture and fixtures was withdrawal from the firm, but the books of accounts of the firm were rejected under section 145 of the Act du .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates