Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Heera Chand Jain Versus The ITO, Ward- 1 (3) , Jaipur

2016 (4) TMI 574 - ITAT JAIPUR

Addition on account of alleged statement recorded at the time of survey - Addition on unexplained purchases - Held that:- Find merit in the contentions of the ld. DR and find that these deliberate lapses are attributable to assessee due to distortion of facts as he failed to intimate the adverse order for the assessment year 2003-04 to successor CIT(A). Such non-disclosure may have been one of the reason for the successor CIT(A) to delete the additions. Similarly nonfiling of appeal by the Depar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2014 for the assessment year 2003-04 raising therein mainly following grounds:- (i) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 3.00 lacs made to the income of the assessee by the AO on account of alleged statement recorded at the time of survey u/s 133A of I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the totality of the facts placed before him. (ii) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the finding recorded by the AO that assessee has made unexplained purchases of ₹ 17,764/- an .....

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 sale bills from the financial year 203-04 onwards were found and impounded. The assessee never maintained any books of account; the stock on the date of survey was valued at ₹ 12,78,794/- and it was also found that assessee had commenced construction of a house about 06 months back from the date of survey wherein estimated investment of ₹ 15.00 lacs was made. In view of all this assessee, in the statement recorded during the course of survey admitted to offer following income for 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

the said declared income from business at ₹ 22,613/- but additional income of ₹ 92,300/- declared by the assessee as addition u/s 68 and as per calculation made on page 3 of assessment order the AO worked out unexplained purchases of ₹ 17,664/- which was assessed as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C and further made disallowance of ₹ 17,664/- under proviso to Section 69C and besides these the AO also added the amount of ₹ 3.00 lacs on account of income surrendered 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

The ld. AR of the assessee further contends that the AO in assessment order for 2003-04 and 2004-05 made addition of Rs. 3.00 lacs on the basis of statement of survey without giving any deduction for income surrendered by assessee in return while in A.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 the AO made addition of ₹ 6.00 lacs, ₹ 8.00 lacs and ₹ 8.00 lacs respectively but allowed deduction of income surrendered by assessee in return making addition of ₹ 4.50 lacs, ₹ 5.09 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

urse of survey amounting to ₹ 12,78,794/- and investment in construction of house amounting to ₹ 15.00 lacs got explained from the accounts prepared and returns filed by assessee for A.Y. 2003-04 to 2008- 09. The addition of ₹ 15,69,673/- in A.Y. 2008-09 made by AO is on account of unexplained investment in house over and above ₹ 15.00 lacs which has been made on the basis of report of Valuation Officer, against which appeal has been filed by assessee which is pending bef .....

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 incumbent. The assessee wantonly did not produce the earlier order for the assessment year 2003-04 passed by ld. CIT(A) before his successors in appeal proceedings for AY 2004-05 to 2007-08. Thus the facts about by the confirmation of additions by ld. CIT(A) for 2003-04 were not disclosed before the successor ld. CIT(A). Thus due to non disclosure of proper facts successor CIT(A) misdirected himself in deleting the additions. As a consequence of distorted facts now there exist two contrary 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

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version