TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1012X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an Chand Ramji Dass Group, were duly accounted or not - There was lack of cooperation on the part of the assessee and did not provide the necessary material called for by the AO - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance for the reason that no incriminating documents against the assessee were found during course of search. M/s Gian Chand Ramji Dass Group has sold goods outside its book of account to the proprietary concerns of the assessee The addition of ₹ 6,81,067/- would not have been warranted, had assessee cooperated and produced the details called for in the course of assessment proceeding - The assessee ought to have furnished necessary material to show that the purchases from M/s Gian Chand Ramji Dass Group were duly reflected in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e addition of ₹ 17,64,527/- by accepting fresh evidence in violation of Rule 46A . 2.1. Grounds raised in the assessee s cross objection reads as under: (i). That on the facts of the case and under the law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not holding that the ld. AO had wrongly assumed jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s 158BD of the IT Act 1961 in the case of the assessee. (ii). That on the facts of the case and under the law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not quashing the assessment order dt. 29.05.2009 as passed by the ld. AO u/s 158BC/158BD. (iii). That on the facts of the case and under the law, the interest u/s 158BFA(1) of the IT Act 1961 was not chargeable. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows. The asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ii) Addition made on account of peak credit in the Bank Account of Pyare Lal Vijay Kumar and Pawan Industrries A.Y. PYARE LAL VIJAY KUMAR PAWAN INDUSTRIES TOTAL 1997-98 429862 [As on 09.11.1996 in Bank of Rajasthan Ltd.] NIL 429862 1998-99 NIL 653598 [As on 07.05.1997 in Union Bank of India] 653598 1999-00 NIL NIL NIL 2000-01 NIL NIL NIL 2001-02 NIL NIL NIL 2002-03 NIL NIL NIL 2003-04 NIL NIL NIL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the assessee being aggrieved by the CIT (A) s order rejecting the assessee s plea, for quashing assessment u/s 158BD has filed CO No.240/2012 before us. 6. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Authorized Representative reiterated the submission made before the Income Tax Authority. 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The total undisclosed income of ₹ 17,64,527/- computed by the AO, comprises of the following two additions (both proprietary concern of the assessee) : i) N.P. at 1% of the total purchases from M/s Gian Chand Ramji Dass Group ₹ 6,81,067/- ii) Addition of peak credit in Bank account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no incriminating documents against the assessee were found during course of search. In the assessment order it has been mentioned that M/s Gian Chand Ramji Dass Group has sold goods outside its book of account to the proprietary concerns of the assessee. The addition of ₹ 6,81,067/- would not have been warranted, had assessee cooperated and produced the details called for in the course of assessment proceeding. The assessee ought to have furnished necessary material to show that the purchases from M/s Gian Chand Ramji Dass Group were duly reflected in the regular book account maintained by the proprietary concerns. For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the opinion that CIT(A) is not justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 6,81,06 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
