TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isclosed income, would not carry any conviction. The reliance placed on by the learned counsel on section 158BA and annexure C said to be a document maintained by the assessee-firm disclosing the details of the said undisclosed income is not acceptable since the said document is very vague, without having the details of dates and the proof of the transaction said to have been effected with the parties except the parties names and the amount. Much emphasis is placed by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, on annexure C, to bring this document under section 158BA(3) of the Act which provides that undisclosed income, if recorded on or before the date of search or requisition in the books of account or other documents maintained in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of Kaveri Bar dated August 27, 2002, was drawn on a stamp paper dated March 31, 1999, purchased by the assessee-firm and the circumstances create a doubt regarding the genuineness of the said partnership deed relied on by the assessee. After a detailed examination of the documents, the Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that the assessee-firm has failed to explain the source of the amount of ₹ 2,50,000 paid to Sri Elias Gerald D' Silva. These are pure questions of facts and the findings given on these factual aspects cannot be interfered by us in this appeal. - Decided against the assessee - I. T. A. No. 498 of 2009. - - - Dated:- 6-4-2015 - VINEET SARAN and MRS. S. SUJATHA, JJ. S. Parthasarathi, Advocate, for the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) at the business premises of the assessee-firm/appellant on September 12, 2002, and at the residential premises of Sri Sunil Kumar, partner of the firm. Certain material containing agreements with Mr. Elias Gerald D' Silva for the purchase of Kaveri Bar was found and seized. Similarly, certain materials relating to the unaccounted sale of the firm were also found and seized. Shri Sunil Kumar, partner of the firm, admitted the undisclosed income of ₹ 3,14,979 and offered the same for tax in the hands of the firm. However, in the return of undisclosed income filed, the firm has declared only ₹ 1,50,821 as its the undisclosed income for the block period. Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment year 2003-04 and as such, the Tribunal without appreciating these material facts, has brought this amount of ₹ 1,64,158 as undisclosed income falling under the block period. 4. The next contention urged by the learned counsel is as regards the payment of ₹ 2,50,000 paid to Sri Elias Gerald D' Silva for purchasing the Kaveri Bar treated to be the unexplained investment of the assessee-firm. It is submitted that no documents were seized by the Department to establish that the flow of money towards the cash payment made to Sri Elias Gerald D'Silva was from the appellant-firm. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel, Sri K. V. Aravind, appearing for the Department contended that subsequent to the search conducted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es except the parties names and the amount. Much emphasis is placed by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, on annexure C, to bring this document under section 158BA(3) of the Act which provides that undisclosed income, if recorded on or before the date of search or requisition in the books of account or other documents maintained in the normal course relating to such previous years shall not be included in the block period. We are unable to appreciate this argument advanced by the learned counsel. No law permits maintenance of two sets of accounts, i.e., one unaccounted and the other accounted. Such scheme of maintaining two different sets of accounts is totally forbidden in law and no credential value can be given to such ille ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
