Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (3) TMI 1022 - ITAT PUNE

2016 (3) TMI 1022 - ITAT PUNE - TMI - Addition made on account of unexplained cash credit in Mauritius Bank Account - Held that:- Find merit in the plea of assessee that where additional income is being added to the income of assessee, then credit for the amount offered by way of additional income, while recording the statement under section 132(4) of the Act should be allowed to the assessee. Another aspect to be noted in this regard is that the CIT(A) vide para 8.7 at page 8 has also allowed t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nk account relates to the assessee, we uphold the addition made on account of interest credited to the bank account of Euro 268.43 equivalent to ₹ 15,413/-. - Decided partly in favour of assessee

Addition on account of Bandra Home on protective and substantive basis - Held that:- First of all, the figure mentioned on the said document is 20.00 and in the absence of Assessing Officer establishing 20.00 stands for ₹ 20 lakhs, the said addition cannot be upheld in the hands o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lakhs. The said flat was being used as guest house and there was no question of earning rental income. Consequently, the objections and assumption raised by both the authorities that the assessee is aware of such flat in Bandra and hence, the name of Ajay relates to the assessee is baseless. First of all, before making any addition in the case of any of assessee, complete details should be available. It is not even clear as to which Bandra flat, the said paper relates and it is also not clear wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

find no merit in the aforesaid additions either on protective and / or substantive basis and we delete the same. Also once if commission income was added in the hands of assessee, then no addition is warranted on account of rental income, since apparently, the assessee was only a broker and cannot be both a broker and owner in the same breath. We find no merit in the orders of authorities below in this regard - Decided in favour of assessee

Addition on account of entry made in the com .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e claim of assessee and not to merely reject the same. The assessee was engaged in the business of real estate and the transaction had to be seen with an angle of business carried on by the assessee. We find no merit in the aforesaid addition made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of assessee, which in turn, has been clarified by him that in case evidence is filed, the same would be deleted. Further, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has fairly pointed out that in order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of search, we find no merit in the said stand of the authorities below. With regard to entries in the books of account, which were made on a later date, however, looking at the difference between the cash found of ₹ 3,78,500/- and the availability of cash as per cash book of ₹ 42,31,973/-, we are of the view that the presumption is in favour of the assessee that the cash found during the course of search is duly explained. In view of the smallness of cash found during the course of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s no merit in any further addition. We find that the CIT(A) vide para 58.7 at page 68 has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee in this regard and we find no merit in the ground of appeal raised by the assessee - Decided against assessee

Addition computed on the basis of cumulative total of credit entries on the seized document - Held that:- In the entirety of the above said facts and circumstances, we find merit in the claim of the assessee that the addit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fit of ₹ 70 lakhs while computing addition in the hands of assessee. The Assessing Officer in the remand report has admitted that the same is allowable to the assessee. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to re -compute the income on the basis of entries in the said document, both credit and debit and to give benefit of additional income of ₹ 70 lakhs before making any addition in the hands of assessee. It may also be clarified here that the additional income of ₹ 70 l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sessee are against consolidated order of CIT(A)-Central, Pune, dated 21.11.2013 relating to assessment years 2007-08, 2008- 09 and 2010-11 against respective orders passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). 2. All the appeals relate to the same assessee on similar issues were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. The assessee in ITA No. 91/PN/2014 has raised the following grounds of appea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e of Your Honour to add, alter, amend and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal. 4. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee is not pressed, hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed. The issue in ground of appeal No.2 raised by the assessee is against the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit in Mauritius Bank Account amounting to ₹ 14,93,773/-. 5. Briefly, in the facts of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to the assessee. However, the assessee did not attend the scrutiny proceedings. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted a letter in response to Summons issued, pointing out that there was threat to the life of assessee and Non-bailable warrant was issued in his name. It was further stated by him that the assessee was not meeting them or his family on account of this and the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee claimed that they would comply with all inform .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

E BORNES) in the name of Ajay Jain was found. Subsequently, the said account was owned up by Shri Ajay Bafna vide submissions dated 13.04.2010. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings submitted that the said document was a copy of bank statement for the month of January, 2010 of Mr. Ajay Amolkh Jain with the said bank having balance of Euro 29,831.97. As per the statement, the balance brought forward was at Euro 29,831.97 as on 31.01.201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng Officer after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that as regards the question that how these papers relate to Ajay Bafna i.e. the assessee, was clear from the fact that the papers were found in the computer of the assessee. The Assessing Officer further noted that the said papers were found during the course of search in the case of assessee as well as in the case of Shri Madhu Koda and others and it was also found that the assessee was close associate of Shri Madhu Koda and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

arded to FTD wing of the CBDT, reply of which was awaited. The Assessing Officer was of the view that, therefore, the onus was upon the assessee to prove that the money deposited in the bank accounts as found on his computer does not belong to him. As per the Assessing Officer, the assessee had not been able to explain the same satisfactorily. Therefore, as per the provisions of section 132(4A) of the Act, presumption is that the entries in the papers belonged to the assessee. Further, with rega .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

,413/-, which was considered as income of the assessee and added to the computation of income. The total addition was made at ₹ 14,93,773/-. Other additions were also made in the hands of assessee, which have been deleted by the CIT(A), against which the Revenue is not in appeal and hence, we proceed to decide the issue of deposit in The Mauritius Bank account totaling ₹ 14,93,773/-. 6. Before the CIT(A), the assessee had filed appeals relating to assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n assessment year 2009-10, credit of Euro 834.88 equivalent to ₹ 56,263/-. The total amount deposited in the said Mauritius Bank account was ₹ 17,04,264/-. The Assessing Officer had asked the assessee to explain the credits in the said account and why the same should not be considered as his income. The claim of the assessee before the CIT(A) was that he had already made voluntary disclosure of ₹ 10 lakhs at the time of filing return of income, which was made to buy peace of mi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ne of the assessee s friend Mr. Hitendranath Beegoo, who was maintaining account with the said bank The said amount was deposited in assessee s account by Mr. Beegoo, by mistake, who in turn, had filed an Affidavit before the Assessing Officer, wherein he clearly mentioned that the said amount of Euro 26000 was wrongly deposited by him in the bank account of the assessee. Mr. Beegoo further stated in the Affidavit that the said amount represented the business funds and in order to establish the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

IT(A) vide para 8.7 while deciding the grounds of appeal relating to assessment year 2004-05 noted that there was deposit of Euro 2000 on 12.09.2003, which has not been disowned by the assessee. The contention of the assessee in this regard was that since he had made disclosure of ₹ 10 lakhs, no separate addition was called for, as against which, the Assessing Officer was of the view that where the assessee has failed to give the proof to show that part of the disclosed income of ₹ 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nsumed by other disclosed income, either admitted by the assessee or unearthed by the Department. In the absence of any such information, the addition of ₹ 1,03,560/- made in assessment year 2004-05 was deleted. 7. While addressing the grounds of appeal relating to assessment year 2007-08 with regard to addition of ₹ 14,93,773/-, reference was made by the CIT(A) to the contentions and arguments raised by the assessee, contents of Assessing Officer s remand report and his order while .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the CIT(A) further pointed out that It is noteworthy that the amount in question (Euro 26,000) was not deposited by Shri Ajay Beegoo but was a remittance from a party by the name Mammoet (S) Pte. Ltd. Information available online pointed out the aforesaid company was a Singapore entity, which was part of a large MNC and there was no record to show any links or transactions between the assessee and the said company. As per documents on record, the transaction of one-off nature with no other trans .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

wn. Moreover, in order for a wire-transfer to be executed successfully, the account number and the name of the payee have to match. Notwithstanding these facts, and assuming for the sake of argument that the amount was indeed deposited in the appellants account instead of Mr. Beegoo s by mistake, it has not been explained how or why the mistake was not detected either by the appellant or by Mr. Beegoo for so many years, or why the amount was neither voluntarily returned by the appellant nor clai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the bank account in this case (unlike the account in Canada) stood in the name of the appellant, it was for the appellant to explain to the satisfaction of the AO the nature of the transaction with convincing proof. Though an explanation has doubtlessly been advanced by the appellant, for the all the reasons discussed above, the same fails to pass the test of preponderance of probability. As such, I do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the AO as regards the addition in question a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

account was found and the assessee was not aware of deposit in his bank account. Further, the contention of the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee was that because of similarity in name, the amount was deposited in assessee s account and both the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) have not verified his claim. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee further stressed that even if the evidences produced by the assessee were not complete, but they were convincing since no s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

horized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the said declaration made by the assessee of ₹ 10 lakhs was to be adjusted against the income declared in assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08. 10. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue in reply, pointed out that the bank statement of The Mauritius Bank was found from the possession of the assessee and in the absence of any explanation vis-à-vis deposits in the said account, additions were made in the hands of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

de on account of deposit of Euro 2000 has been deleted by the CIT(A). 11. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee further pointed out that in addition to the deposit of Euro 26000, there was interest accruing to the assessee of Euro 268.43 equivalent to ₹ 15,413/-. 12. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The issue arising before us vide ground of appeal No.2 is in relation to the addition made on account of deposits in The Mauritius Commercial Bank ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rious papers and documents found / seized in his hands. The assessee has subsequently owned up the said account. While deciding the appeal relating to assessment year 2004-05 in relation to deposit of Euro 2000 on 12.09.2003, the assessee first made a claim that the said amount was deposited by Shri Ajay Beegoo, by mistake in the bank account of the assessee. However, the CIT(A) noted vide para 8.4 that the assessee vide his submission dated 10.10.2013 that he had already made voluntary disclosu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ned up by Shri Ajay Beegoo to be belonging to him and it was claimed by him that by mistake the same was deposited in the bank account of the assessee. The CIT(A) vide paras 30.4 and 30.5 has met with the submissions of the assessee in this regard and we find no merit in the claim of the assessee that the said amount of Euro 26000 was deposited by Shri Ajay Beegoo and does not belong to him. As per the findings of CIT(A), the amount was deposited by way of remittance from a different company whi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue has strongly objected to the said plea of the assessee, but we find merit in the aforesaid plea of assessee that where additional income is being added to the income of assessee, then credit for the amount offered by way of additional income, while recording the statement under section 132(4) of the Act should be allowed to the assessee. Another aspect to be noted in this regard is that the CIT(A) vide para 8.7 at page 8 has also allowed the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

account relates to the assessee, we uphold the addition made on account of interest credited to the bank account of Euro 268.43 equivalent to ₹ 15,413/-. The ground of appeal No.2 raised by the assessee is thus, partly allowed. 15. The assessee in ITA No. 92/PN/2014 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the additions made by the assessing officer on account of the 2. The Learned Commissio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the additions made by the assessing officer on account of the entry made in the computer in the name of the Kohinoor's account amounting to ₹ 47,00,000/- 5. The appellant craves leave of Your Honour to add, alter, amend and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal. 16. The ground of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee is general and hence, the same is dismissed. Further, the ground of appea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e course of assessment proceedings considered the document which is attached with the Public Interest Litigation Petition (PIL) No.4700/2008, which was filed before the Hon ble High Court of Jharkhand by one Shri Durga Oraon alleging corrupt practices by Shri Madhu Koda and others. Through the affidavit, the Hon ble Court was requested to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct an enquiry against accumulation of disproportionate assets by number of persons, who were Ministers .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

h talks of entries of Bandra Home and the name of Ajay on the said document. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee had received sum of ₹ 88 lakhs and the assessee was asked to explain the nature of entry. In reply, the assessee pointed out that this paper was with the Assessing Officer from PIL made at Ranchi. The assessee vehemently stated that he had no connection with this Bandra Flat and further it was not known the basis, the Department drawn presumption that the nam .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and pointed out that there was no relation between the flat and income of assessee and accordingly, no addition should be made. The assessee further also pointed out that he had no commercial relations with Mr. Madhu Koda and his accomplice, which fact was stated before the Investigation Department and now before the Assessing Officer. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee stressed that even the Investigation Department concluded that the assessee had no connection with Mr. Mad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

owards Bandra Home. The Assessing Officer further pointed out that may be the assessee is not the owner of house, however, the nature of entry and the nature of transaction indicates that the assessee had acted as a broker for arranging the transaction probably for rent. The seized paper as per the Assessing Officer, indicated that out of ₹ 88 lakhs, ₹ 68 lakhs had been paid and he had earned brokerage of ₹ 20 lakhs. However, since the assessee has failed to show this income, s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

id page and if he was so aware, then the name on paper automatically tallies with the name of assessee and under such circumstances, clear-cut inference could be drawn as the assessee was hiding the details. 19. The CIT(A) vide para 41 at pages 41 onwards considered the said issue i.e. the observations of Assessing Officer and explanation of the assessee and claim of the assessee that contents of the said document did not pertain to him and that the said document has no evidentiary value in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sis and on the presumption that the document relates to the assessee, merits to be deleted. The assessee also stressed that there is no evidence of receipt of ₹ 20 lakhs as commission. With regard to the contention of the Assessing Officer that the assessee was aware about the details of flat, then the name mentioned in the document relates to the assessee, it was pointed out by him that before the Assessing Officer, a query was raised as from where and how he got those documents and how d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee had claimed that he was aware of one flat at Bandra, in respect of which, he had acted as broker. The assessee claimed although the transaction did not materialize and presuming that the said document referred to the said property at Bandra, the assessee has provided information about the said property to the Assessing Officer with an intention to enable him to verify the facts as regards the nature of transaction, value of transaction and nature of involvement of assessee. The CIT(A) i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd to have confirmed substantially in the hands of any other persons, then this order would be rectified so as to delete the said amount. 20. The assessee is in appeal against the order of CIT(A). 21. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee before us has stressed that the said document was attached to one PIL and was not found from the possession of assessee during the course of survey. Further, the said document only mentioned name Ajay , but there is no information to establish .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he transactional value of ₹ 68 lakhs of rent and assessee was held to have earned brokerage of ₹ 20 lakhs. He stressed that where the document does not belong to the assessee and where only protective addition was made by the Assessing Officer, where the substantive addition was not made and the CIT(A) makes part of it substantive and the balance as protective and issues directions to the Assessing Officer, which have not been complied with till date. 22. The learned Departmental Rep .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

one such addition which has been confirmed in the paras hereinabove by us is with regard to entries in Mauritius Commercial Bank as unexplained credits in the said Bank. Though, we have directed the Assessing Officer to allow an alternate plea of the assessee, but the addition perse has been confirmed in the hands of assessee. 24. Now, coming to the present addition made by the Assessing Officer of ₹ 20 lakhs on substantive basis and ₹ 68 lakhs on protective basis, the same relates t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on one of the papers filed talked about Bandra Home with name Ajay below it. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the name of assessee before us i.e. Ajay Bafna was mentioned as Ajay on the said document and consequently, the entries on the said documents related to the assessee. In view thereof, the assessee was show caused as to why the addition of ₹ 88 lakhs should not be made in the hands of assessee. The said document is scanned and reproduced under para 8 of the assessment orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the assessee in this regard was that the above said document was not found from his possession and as such, there is no presumption under section 132(4) of the Act that the entries in the said document belonged to the assessee. Further, it was pointed out by the assessee himself that there was no connection whatsoever with Bandra Flat, except for an enquiry made in respect of the said property at Bandra. The assessee provided the information with regard to said property to the Assessing Officer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

are of said Bandra Flat, the entries on the said document related to the assessee. Further, presumption was that out of ₹ 88 lakhs, rent for the said building was ₹ 68 lakhs and commission earned by the assessee was ₹ 20 lakhs. Consequently, addition of ₹ 20 lakhs was made on substantive basis and addition of ₹ 68 lakhs was made on protective basis. 25. The substantive addition in the hands of assessee was being made on account of commission of ₹ 20 lakhs i.e. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e the assessee is held to be a broker, who in turn, has earned commission of ₹ 20 lakhs on a transaction, the value of the transaction cannot be added in the hands of assessee as belonging to the assessee even on protective basis. The first and foremost rule of making any addition in the hands of assessee on the basis of any seized document is the paramount establishment of factum that the documents relate to the assessee. First of all, the said document was not found from the possession o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is no merit in any addition in the hands of assessee alleging that the commission of ₹ 20 lakhs has been earned by the assessee. First of all, the figure mentioned on the said document is 20.00 and in the absence of Assessing Officer establishing 20.00 stands for ₹ 20 lakhs, the said addition cannot be upheld in the hands of assessee. Secondly, the said document has not been proved to relate to the assessee and merely because the assessee had given certain information about Bandra f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the authorities that the assessee is aware of such flat in Bandra and hence, the name of Ajay relates to the assessee is baseless. First of all, before making any addition in the case of any of assessee, complete details should be available. It is not even clear as to which Bandra flat, the said paper relates and it is also not clear what are the entries made on that document whether relating to sale of the property or giving the same on rent. In the absence of any clarity, the said document at .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion income was added in the hands of assessee, then no addition is warranted on account of rental income, since apparently, the assessee was only a broker and cannot be both a broker and owner in the same breath. We find no merit in the orders of authorities below in this regard and reversing the same, we allow ground of appeal No.2 raised by the assessee. 26. Now, coming to the issue in ground of appeal No.4 raised by the assessee i.e. against the addition of ₹ 47 lakhs on account of entr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f cash of ₹ 1.50 crores to Kohinoor (Bom) on 26.05.2007. Further, there was cash debit of ₹ 35 lakhs on 30.05.2007 to Hitesh. The assessee was asked as to why the said amount should not be considered as his income and taxed accordingly. The assessee explained that though this account was found from his computer in soft, it was in the books of somebody and it does not have assessee s name. It may have been downloaded from e-mail and he further submitted that the account is owned up by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

egoo had not given the essence of transaction and Affidavit is not supported by passport details of relevant dates. Therefore, the verification of the said transaction as per the assessee was not possible. The Assessing Officer further holds that the said addition would be deleted if necessary evidence was produced by the assessee. 28. The CIT(A) upheld the addition as the Affidavit of Shri Ajay Beegoo did not refer to the information in particular and he also did not explain the connection with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and on the basis of this, addition of ₹ 47 lakhs was made in the hands of assessee. He further submitted that in order to cover up the discrepancy, he had offered ₹ 40 lakhs up to 31.03.2007 and ₹ 10 lakhs in assessment year 2008-09, but no period was mentioned anywhere. 31. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue placed reliance on earlier submissions made in this regard. 32. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The addition of ₹ 47 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

against available cash of ₹ 1.38 crores and the balance of ₹ 47 lakhs was added as income from undisclosed sources in the hands of assessee. The case of Revenue authorities in this regard is that the presumption under section 132(4A) of the Act is against the assessee since the above said entries were found from an account extract available on the computer of the assessee. The explanation of the assessee on the other hand, was that these entries did not belong to him, but belong to o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

#8377; 47 lakhs as income of the assessee, but then he further clarified that the said addition would be deleted, if the necessary evidence was produced by the assessee. Before the CIT(A), the assessee furnished information and it was pointed out that though the account title as Kohinoor account was found from his computer, but no connection of the assessee with the said Kohinoor has been found. Further, no evidence was found during the course of search in respect of the said transaction, though .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

icient evidence was produced before the Assessing Officer, there was no justification in the aforesaid addition, which was without any basis. Admittedly, in case any document is found from the possession and control of the assessee within meaning of section 132(4A) of the Act, the presumption is that the document belonged to assessee, but the contents of the document have to be seen whether the same has any connection with the assessee. In case the contents of the document are not complete to es .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

passport details in this regard that he was in Pune during the period and those documents were prepared by him and they belonged to him. The onus in this regard was upon the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of assessee and not to merely reject the same. The assessee was engaged in the business of real estate and the transaction had to be seen with an angle of business carried on by the assessee. We find no merit in the aforesaid addition made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of assess .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of appeal No.4 raised by the assessee is thus, allowed. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are thus, partly allowed. 33. The assessee in ITA No. 93/PN/2014 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in low and: in facts in not appreciating that the assessment order passed by the assessing officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s 153A of the Act was bad in low and invalid. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in lo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

) has erred in low and in facts in confirming the additions made by the assessing officer on account of unexplained cash in the cash book amounting to ₹ 1,18,97,000/-. 5. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in low and in facts in not deleting the addition of ₹ 13,62,000/-, included in the additions of ₹ 1,18,97,000/- as the some amounts to the double addition. 34. The ground of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee being general, is not pressed and the same .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the assessee had sufficient cash balance to justify the cash found. The explanation of the assessee was rejected by the CIT(A) since the residential and business premises of the assessee were covered and remaining amount of cash was not found at the time of search. Further, the CIT(A) noted that the fact of non-maintenance of cash book in regular course was sufficient to reject the explanation of the assessee. 37. The assessee is in appeal against the order of CIT(A) and pointed out that all doc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed from his premises during the course of search amounting to ₹ 3,78,500/-. The explanation of the assessee was that the said cash was out of cash balance in its books of account and was accounted for in the books of account. The assessee had made entries in the cash book and had worked out the cash balance of ₹ 42,31,973/- as on date of search. The said entries of availability of cash were rejected by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) on the premise that the books of account were .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8377; 42,31,973/-, we are of the view that the presumption is in favour of the assessee that the cash found during the course of search is duly explained. In view of the smallness of cash found during the course of search as against the large amount shown in the books of account, we accept the plea of the assessee. However, this decision of our, shall not be used as precedent in any other case. The ground of appeal No.2 raised by the assessee is thus, allowed. 40. Now, coming to the grounds of a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the issue also, certain information was collected from the computer Excel sheet under Kranti group and certain entries were found. However, no period / date was mentioned and at the end, there was credit of ₹ 13,62,000/- and the assessee was asked as to why the said credit should not be considered as his income. The assessee in reply stated that this is found from computer and in the books of somebody. It did not relate to him and he did not carry assessees name and did not carry any date .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd ₹ 60 lakhs was disclosed as additional income for assessment year 2010-11 in order to buy peace of mind and to cover up any transactions arising out of seized documents representing undisclosed activity. He asked for the same. The assessee also produced the cash book. However, certain information was asked for by the Assessing Officer and the assessee expressed his inability to produce the same. The Assessing Officer thus, held that the evidence brought on record was not verifiable, whe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

addition of ₹ 1,18,97,000/-. However, from the computation of income, we do not find the said set off of the income. As per return of income, declared income has been taken at ₹ 70,07,190/-, to which unexplained cash of ₹ 1.18 crores and other additions totaling ₹ 1.40 crores are added and the total income assessed as ₹ 2.10 crores. 43. The CIT(A) upheld the addition of ₹ 13,62,000/- in the hands of assessee rejecting the contention of the assessee in this reg .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uded, then no further addition is to be made in the hands of assessee, The second aspect is the addition of ₹ 1.18 crores. The contention of the assessee before the CIT(A) was that the Assessing Officer has only considered the credit entries in the document and not considered the debit entries. However, this contention of the assessee was rejected observing that the assessee has failed to raise any serious arguments challenging the merits of additions of income. Further, the CIT(A) noted t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ated 16.09.2013 had reiterated that there was no objection for relief of ₹ 70 lakhs as admitted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. Hence, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee in this regard, was dismissed. 44. The assessee is in appeal against the observations of CIT(A) and has stressed that while computing addition in the hands of assessee to the extent of ₹ 1.18 crores, the Assessing Officer has only considered credit side of the entries, but not debit side en .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e rival contentions and perused the record. The first addition in the hands of assessee is on account of entries under the head Sai Account totaling ₹ 13,62,000/-. The assessee admits to have included the said sum of ₹ 13,62,000/- in the declared income of ₹ 70 lakhs for the year under consideration and since the amount was additional income, there was no merit in any further addition. We find that the CIT(A) vide para 58.7 at page 68 has directed the Assessing Officer to verif .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessing Officer had made the aforesaid addition on the basis of pages 2 to 10 of the Bundle No.1 seized during the course of search, which contained datewise receipts and payments account for the period from 27.11.2009 to 13.02.2010. It is a trite law and held by various judicial authorities that in case reliance is placed on seized documents, then the complete entries on the said documents are to be considered for working out the addition, if any, in the hands of assessee. The Assessing Office .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version