TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g upon the decision in CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. [1986 (3) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court] - No question of law arises where the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee has discharged the burden that lay on him by furnishing the names, addresses, index numbers of the alleged creditors. In this case, creditors have given confirmation as well as their returns of income were also furnished before the AO - The AO rejected the evidences on the basis that there is a cash deposit of Rs.1 lac before one or two credit entries of loan making to the assessee - The AO has recorded that the loan was provided on 22/11/2006 and on 6/12/2006 and the cash was deposited on 28/09/2006 - The presumption of AO was wrong - Decided in favour of ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jari Textile group on 20.01.2009. Thereafter, the case was centralized and, subsequently, notice u/s.153A of the Income Tax Act was issued on 27/07/2009. The assessee, as per provision of section 153A, was requested to file the return of income for the year under consideration. In response thereto, the assessee had filed return of income on 13/09/2009 declaring total income of Rs.54,36,861/-. Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed vide order dated 29/12/2010, thereby the Assessing Officer(AO) made addition of Rs.64,84,976/- on account of unexplained investment in land at "Sai Ichcha Project" and also ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... absence of such material addition is not justified. 3.1. On the contrary, ld.CIT-DR Shri Subhash Bains supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that there is no infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A). He submitted that admittedly the addition has been made on the basis of the seized paper recovered from the premises of the assessee. The assessee has not given a satisfactory explanation of the noting on the seized paper. He submitted that from the record it is evident that the assessee in its accounts treated a separate account for the tenants, but how this amount which is now claimed to be paid to the tenants was not incorporated into such account which was made by the assessee. He submitted that the assessee changed h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmed the addition on the basis that the entire addition has been made after considering figures mentioned in seized papers, establishing the linkage of seized material with books of accounts, on detailed reasoning not accepting appellant's plea and further the appellant's entire explanation is solely an afterthought and not supported by any corroborative evidence even such seized material is found from premises of appellant. 4.1. The contention of the assessee is that the Revenue is not justified in making the addition merely on the basis of noting found on a seized paper. It is also contended that a business man makes estimation for the project taking by various consideration into account but the actual expenditure is incurred and amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record in support of his contention that the figure represented is not an estimation but it is actual payment of the 'on-money', since the market value of the land in the particular area is higher than the assessee has reflected in his books of accounts. Moreover, neither the AO nor the ld.CIT(A) has treated this sum as receipt or expenditure, made on any other account. In the absence of the same, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) is not justified. 6. The second ground is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.4 lacs made u/s.68 of the Act. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) is not justified and against the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that the CIT-DR has heavily relied on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of Blessing Construction vs. ITO(supra). We also find that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has not considered the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt.Ltd.(supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that no question of law arises where the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee has discharged the burden that lay on him by furnishing the names, addresses, index numbers of the alleged creditors. In the present case, creditors have given confirmation as well as their returns of income were also furnished before the AO. The AO rejected the evidences on the basis that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
