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

2016 (5) TMI 1146 - ITAT DELHI

2016 (5) TMI 1146 - ITAT DELHI - TMI - Addition u/s 69A - whether the assessee has explained source and genuineness of the seized amount having been belonging to its sister concern during the assessment proceedings? - Held that:- No plausible explanation has come on record during the assessment proceedings or thereafter as to why the cash book, subsequently relied upon by the assessee, has not been produced before the AO particularly when the assessee company along with its sister concern was op .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rch and seizure conducted on 12.08.2007. So, the CIT (A) has rightly dismissed the assessee’s appeal. - ITA No. 1738/Del./2012 - Dated:- 9-5-2016 - Shri S. V. Mehrotra, Accountant Member And Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri U.N. Marwa, CA For the Revenue : Shri Amit Mohan Govil, CIT DR ORDER Per Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member Appellant, M/s. Sareen Estates Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the assessee ), by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the imp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

,000/-. 1.2 That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(appeals) while upholding the order of the learned AO failed to consider and appreciate the evidence filed being copy of the cash book for the period 1st April 2006 to 31st March 2007 which was filed before him at his behest, to establish that the cash in hand existed even as at 31st March 2007. 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-I, New Delhi, erred in not accepting the explanation offered by the appellant that the seized cash belonged to various entities 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

n 17.09.2009 declaring income of ₹ 4,08,46,267/- qua AY 2008-09. Consequent upon the notices issued u/s 143(2) and 142(1) along with questionnaire, Shri Anil Kumar, CA and thereafter Shri Aditya Purwar, CA put in appearance and filed necessary details. Assessee is into the business of real estate development and construction activities. During the search, cash of ₹ 73,43,000/- was found out of which ₹ 70,00,000/- was seized from the business premises of the assessee. On failure .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mpugned order. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 4. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Undisputed facts of this case inter alia are that the premises searched by the revenue authorities on 12.09.2007 was being used by 8/10, group compan .....

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 as to whether the assessee has explained source and genuineness of the seized amount of ₹ 70,00,000/- having been belonging to its sister concern during the assessment proceedings?. 7. AO in order to made the addition by ₹ 70,00,000/- to the income of the assessee returned the findings which are reproduced as under for ready reference :- 4. During the search cash of ₹ 73,43,000/- was found out of which an amount ₹ 70,00,000/- was seized from the business premise 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

is cash in hand of the following companies as on the day of search :- Moonlight Continental Pvt. Ltd. Rs.25,00,000/- New Era Impex (India) Pvt. Ltd Rs.15,00,000/- Augite Estate Pvt. Ltd. Rs.15,00,000/- Ostrich Estate Pvt. Ltd Rs.15,00,000/- Total : Rs.70,00,000/- The contention of the assessee was considered and but found not sustainable in as much as none of the companies could produce the cash book at the time of search from where the above amount seized could have been verified. In the event .....

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 search. Hence, the above contention of the assessee that the cash found is actually cash in hand in all the above companies can safely be said to be an afterthought. Moreover, the statements recorded during the search were burnt in the fire that occurred immediately after the search. Hence the cash of ₹ 70,00,000/- seized during the search, is treated as the undisclosed income of the assessee for the year under consideration. (Addition of ₹ 70,00,000/-) 8. Ld. CIT (A), after callin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

document under doubt. 9. When the facts and circumstances of the case, documents brought on record by the assessee during assessment proceedings as well as remand proceedings, are examined in the light of the order passed by the lower revenue authorities below, we are of the considered view that there is no scope to interfere into the findings returned by the AO/ld.CIT (A) for the following reasons :- (i) that no plausible explanation has come on record during the assessment proceedings or there .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

any during the period 01.04.2007 to 12.09.2007 placed before the CIT (A) was not signed by the Directors/auditors. It is difficult to admit any such statement into the evidence without the signature of any authorized signatory; (iv) that the contention of the ld. AR that the cash book was seized at the time of search and seizure operation is not tenable because cash book only qua the period 01.04.2006 to 31.03.2007 was produced whereas the period under consideration was roughly starts after six .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tement out of which the cash was allegedly withdrawn; (vi) that the cash amount of ₹ 30,00,000/-, shown at page 74 of the paper book, attributed to M/s. Moonlight Continental (P) Ltd. was shown deposited in September 2006 i.e. one year prior to the search showing least nexus with the seized amount; (vii) that similarly, the amount of ₹ 10,00,000/- each is shown deposited on 01.06.2006 in case of M/s. New Era Impex (India) (P) Ltd., lying at page 78 of the paper book; (viii) that in c .....

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