9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration of the following substantial question of law: Whether the Tribunal's conclusion that the assessee had received salary of Rs. 8000/- p.m. for the relevant block years in each year without evidence, is perverse? 2. A search u/s 158BC was carried out at the premises of the assessee on 21.10.1999. As against NIL return filed by the assessee on 23.04.2001, the assessment was completed determining undisclosed income of Rs. 53,87,152/-. The Assessing Officer during the course of statement u/s 132(4) observed that the assessee had stated his monthly income to be Rs. 8000/- from Om Travels which is being run in the name of his wife which fact had been confirmed by his wife in her statement in reply to question no. 17. Later on the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s office notice dt. 19.10.2001 and the assessee was required to show cause as to why the sum of Rs. 96,000 per annum for the last 10 years which comes to Rs. 9,60,000 should be taken as his undisclosed income. In reply sent by Registered Post, assessee did not comment on his own statement u/s 132(4) which was also supported by his wife's statement. The assessee merely stated that he has not received any salary. It is to be appreciated here that neither the assessee nor his wife till date has retracted from their sworn statement u/s 132(4). Thus, mere denial at the time of assessment i.e. after a considerable lapse of time that he has not received any salary does not serve any purpose, unless the assessee has retracted from his statements wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Rs. 9,60,000/- as undisclosed income for ten years. In this connection he has relied upon a decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in [2016] 70 taxmann.com 95 (Delhi) and submitted that a statement recorded under section 132(4) can form a basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search and seizure. Referring to the substantial question of law raised in the said decision, he submitted that the merely on the statement of assessee, assumption made is not good. 3.3 Mr. Hemani has further drawn the attention of this Court to Circular No. F. No. 286/2/2003 - IT (Inv. II) dated 10.03.2003 whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated and not for entire block period. He submitted that in the instant case the statement was recorded in October 1999 and therefore the assessment ought to have been only for the period from 01.06.1999 to 31.10.1999 i.e. for a period of six months and not for the entire block period. 4. Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Ms. Mauna Bhatt, learned advocate for the revenue submitted that in view of the concurrent findings arrived at by the Tribunal as well as CIT(A), this Court may not interfere in the impugned order. He submitted that the Assessing Officer had relied upon the statement made by the assessee's wife that she was paying a remuneration of Rs. 8000/- p.m to the assessee for looking after her business in the nam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 132(4) of the Act is not limited only to the books of accounts or other assets or material found during the search. However in the context of Section 158BB(1) of the Act which expressly restricts the computation of undisclosed income to the evidence found during search, the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can form a basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search and cannot be the sole basis for making a block assessment." [Emphasis Supplied] 5.2 We would also like to refer to the circular dated 10.03.2003 issued by the revenue and relied upon by learned advocate for the assessee which relates to confession of additional in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e statement made u/s 132(4). 6. Moreover, the calculation made for the entire block period without any basis or material from the seized documents, in our opinion, cannot be permitted. In the case of Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd. (supra), this Court has held that as the materials admittedly related to a brief period between 01.4.1998 till 29.7.1998, in absence of any documents found during search to even link the assessee's activities for the entire period, to project by way of extrapolation the facts found during the brief period of about four months would not be permissible and rightly so held by the Tribunal. 7. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has erred in coming to the conclusion that the assessee had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
