9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee in both the years give rise to the following two issues: a) Validity of search conduced in the hands of the assessee under section 132 of the Act; and b) Validity of accepting the additional income disclosed by the assessee in the return of income filed u/s 153A of the Act. 3. The facts relating to the issues are stated in brief. A search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Transworld Furtichem Pvt Ltd. Group of companies and consequently, the assessee was also covered in the search action on 11.2.2011. Pursuant to the search action, notice under section 153A of the Act was issued. In response thereto the assessee filed return of income for both the years under consideration disclosing ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 (Kar) in order to submit that the Tribunal is empowered to decide the issue relating to validity of search. 7. However, in my view, the validity of search action should be upheld if one of the three conditions prescribed under section 132 (1) of the Act has been complied with by the Revenue. I notice that the assessee is raising this contention without bringing any material on record to show that any one the conditions have not been complied with by the Revenue before initiating the search action. The ld. AR contends that the assessee tried to get the information under RTI, but the revenue has refused to furnish relevant details. However, we notice that the only reason on which the assessee is questioning the validity of search is that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above said legal propositions, the assessee is now contending that the additional income so offered was not relatable to any incriminating material and hence, in the absence of any incriminating material, the assessing officer should not have assessed the same. The ld. A.R placed his reliance on hosts of decision wherein the above said proposition was followed. The ld. A.R also placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.V.Mr.P.Firm (1965)(56 ITR 0067), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if a particular income is not taxable under the IT Act, it cannot be taxed on the basis of estoppels or any other equitable doctrine. 9. However, we notice that the assessee has given following ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was found during the course of search. In my view, the provisions of section 153A nowhere states that the assessee is precluded from offering such kind of undisclosed income in the return of income from out of his bank account and voluntarily offered the same for taxation u/s 153A of the Act. Hence, in my view, the assessee was not entitled to contend for exclusion of the same, since the undisclosed income has been identified by the assessee himself. 10. The legal proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Murli Agro Product Ltd (supra), in my view, puts embargo upon the assessing officer, i.e., the assessing officer is precluded from disturbing already concluded issues or from making fresh additions unless ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
