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 (12) TMI 1410

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 007-08, the assessee is objecting the confirming the addition of Rs. 60 Lakh made on account of unexplained investment in share of M/s Persian Agro Hot Enterprises. 3. Brief facts of the case are that search operation under section 132(4) of the Act was conducted on 5.6.2007 at residential and business premises of the Metro group of cases. The assessee was inter alia covered in the search operations. Notice u/s 153 (A) was issued on 10.10.2009 by the Assessing Officer directing the assessee to file the return. The return declaring income of Rs. 19,49,580/- which was the same as declared in the original return filed under Section 139(1). During the search proceeding it was found that assessee had purchased shares of Persian Agro Hot Pvt. Li .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... paid pending negotiations and finalization of terms and conditions. It was further submitted that the said amount of Rs. 2.50 lakhs was covered by the declaration made by the group company M/s Thakkar Popatlal Velji Sales Ltd. It was explained that M/s Thakkar Velji Sales Pvt. Ltd. had declared the additional income of Rs. 3 Crore u/s 132(4). 3 crore was declared to cover amongst the unaccounted income if any arising out of the unaccounted transactions in the papers, books, registers etc. found and seized in the couse of search. It was also explained that the said income is applied for acquiring cash, jewellery, bill of exchange and other valuables found during the course of search. Accordingly it was submitted that no addition was warrant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... raised before lower authorities were reiterated by learned Counsel of assessee. Reliance was also placed on the decision in case of Prem Sons decided in ITR no 4698/Mum/2006 for assessment year 2003-04 dated 15.01.2009. 7. On the other hand, learned DR placed reliance on the order of CIT(A). 8. After considering the submission and perusing the material on record, we find that this matter should go back to the file of the Assessing Officer. No doubt during the course of search statement u/s 132(4) was recorded of the assessee by which it was admitted that he will disclose a sum of Rs. 60 Lakh for the year in consideration and amount of Rs. 65 Lakh for assessment year 2008-09. However while, filing the return no such amount was declared by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s (263 ITR 101) and in case of S. Kadir Khan (300 ITR 167) Madras. Though these decisions were in connection with the survey conducted u/s 133(A). However, the position could not be changed if statement has been recorded u/s 132(4) as there should be some corroborative evidence. Since, Assessing Officer made addition on the basis of statement recorded and no other enquiry has been made, neither case has been examined properly, nor the fact that the company in which the assessee is a director has surrendered additional income. As per submission of learned AR Rs. 3 Crores covers of investments found during the search and any investment made in jwellery etc. Therefore, we restore the issue to the file of Assessing Officer to examine afresh aft .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The addition of Rs. 45 Lakh on account of unexplained investment in cash receipt at Rs. 20 lakh out of total addition of Rs. 45 lakh, on account of unexplained investment in Jwellery at Rs.20 Lakh and Rs. 5 lakh on account of unaccounted income as per loose papers were made by the AO, which was based on the basis of statement recorded u/s 132(4) by Shri Yogesh Thakkar, (the assessee). In appeal, the CIT (A) restricted the addition on account of cash receipt of Rs. 20 lakh as 20 lakh was deleted. However, addition on account of jwellery and loose paper were sustained for simple reason that the assessee agreed to show the income. 13. We have already discussed the issue in detail. The assesse's main argument is that these amounts are covere .....

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