Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Sri Petla Jagannadh Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5, Hyderabad

2016 (5) TMI 331 - ITAT HYDERABAD

Addition on Cash received - addition made based on a document found at the premises of M/s. R.R. Movie Makers when there was a search at their premises - Held that:- Since the evidentiary value of the document was certainly examined it was held that in the absence of any corroborative evidence, the same will not have any evidentiary value. The Revenue did not establish that the said document was not prepared for distribution purposes. It is also on record that assessee in the statement recorded .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eover, the assessment order was not passed even u/s. 153C. Therefore, the addition cannot be sustained in the hands of assessee only because certain documents stated to have been filed for the purpose of marketing the cinema and not the actual expenditure cannot be considered for making an addition in the hands of assessee. Accordingly, the grounds of assessee are allowed, the addition so made is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A. No. 424/HYD/2015 - Dated:- 23-3-2016 - SMT. P. 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

of ₹ 1,98,38,784/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessment was completed on a total income of ₹ 2,45,24,936/-. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer (AO) made certain additions. One of the additions was an amount of ₹ 10,00,000/-, being cash received from M/s. R.R. Movie Makers. This addition was made based on a document found at the premises of M/s. R.R. Movie Makers when there was a search at their premises. Aggrieved by the order of AO, 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

the provisions of u/s. 292C of the Income Tax Act. 3. The Appellate Commissioner ought not to have confirmed the order of the AO in addition an amount of ₹ 10,00,000/-. 4. The Appellate Commissioner ought not to have confirm the addition on an entirely differed premise ignoring the fact that the AO has confirmed the addition based on the presumption u/s. 292C. 5. The Appellate Commissioner can not draw inference on a different parameters, without following due process of law. 6. Any other .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ple; one such person is assessee, who is the director of the movie. On the basis of the said document and invoking the provisions of Section 292C, AO made the addition of ₹ 10 Lakhs stated to be amount received and not disclosed. 4. Assessee contended before the Ld. CIT(A) that provisions of Section 292C are not applicable to the assessee and the said Phaneendra Reddy denied having paid any amounts in cash and relied on various judgments also. Ld. CIT(A), however, relying on the extracts 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

hed. Therefore, reliance on Section 292C is not correct. Ld. DR however, while justifying the action of the AO submitted that provisions of Section 292C(2) will apply and supported the orders. 6. We have considered the issue and examined. The addition in the hands of Shri G. Mahesh Babu, which was deleted by the Co-ordinate Bench (wherein AM is also co-author) has considered the same documents, as under: 34. The only other ground that survives for consideration is in ITA No.58/Hyd/2015, wherein, .....

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 had been paid cash of ₹ 2 crores. Whereas it was noticed by the Assessing Officer, assessee had only shown remunrati0on of ₹ 4.87 crores, received in cheque from the movie Businessman without disclosing the amount of ₹ 2 crore in cash as revealed from seized material. The Assessing Officer, therefore, issued summons to both assessee and the producer Shri j.V.Phanindra Reddy. As observed by Assessing Officer, both assessee and Shri Reddy flatly denied of any payment havin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

seized from a third party cannot form the basis for addition and also relied upon some judicial authorities in that context, the Assessing Officer rejecting all contentions of assessee treated the amount of ₹ 2 crore as the undisclosed income of the assessee for the year. Though the assessee challenged the addition in appeal, the learned CIT(A) sustained the addition more or less adopting the reasoning of the Assessing Officer. 36. Learned Authorised Representative s submissions while con .....

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 any cash transaction. Therefore, solely relying upon a loose sheet seized from a third party, having no evidentiary value, addition cannot be made. The second argument advanced by the learned Authorised Representative is, even accepting that cash payment recorded in the seized material is correct, no specific date is mentioned against such payment. Drawing the attention of the bench to the seized material at page 3 of the paper-book, he submitted, dates appearing against each pay-ment is in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Rao (2014) 39 CCH 0034 (Hyd. Trib) (c) DCIT V/s. C. Krishna Yadav (2011) 46 SOT 250 (Hyd) 37. Learned Departmental Representative, relied upon the reasoning of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). 38. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the materials on record. We have also examined the decisions cited at the Bar. Undisputedly, the basis for the addition of ₹ 2 crores as undisclosed income is a loose sheet seized not from the assessee, but from a third party, 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

d out in the case of assessee, no incriminating material was found. It is also a fact on record that pursuant to summons issued, both the assessee as well as the producer of the movie appeared before the Assessing Officer and denied of having made any cash transaction as recorded in the seized document. In fact, a confirmation letter obtained from the producer stating therein that entire remunerations are paid in cheques was also submitted before the Assessing Officer. Further, remuneration rece .....

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 establish the cash payment to assessee. In our view, in the absence of any other corroborative evidence to prove the contents of the seized document to be correct, it will have no evidentiary value in the eye of law, hence, no addition can be made solely relying upon such document. More so, when both the assessee as well as the person from whom the document was seized have denied of having entered into any such transaction/ Therefore, in our view, the addition made by the Assessing Officer can .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ts are in chronological order, assessee s contention that payment made to him, if at all, is prior to February, 2011 is acceptable. Keeping these facts in view when the Bench made a specific query to Learned Departmental Representative to explain how Assessing Officer has correlated the payment to the impugned assessment year, he has no valid answer for the same. Therefore, even accepting for argument s sake that contents of seized document are correct, but certainly, it cannot be linked to 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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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