TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Maruti Zen Car - Held that:- Additions were made by the assessing officer only after applying his mind. The mere fact that it has been reproduced verbatim of the previous assessment order does not mean that the assessing officer had not applied his mind. It is the duty of the assessee to explain the source of the money that came into his account. The only explanation of assessee's daughter that the demand drafts were purchased in the name of her father because it was easy to get the car on priority basis if it was booked in her father's name, of course, is an explanation to be accepted provided the source of the money was properly explained with such precision. It has not been done so. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that this addition made by the assessing officer is to be confirmed. Protective assessment - Double addition - as contended by the assessee that many of the items of income which were assessed in the hands of the assessee were already assessed in the hands of his wife - Held that:- It is well settled that where there is a doubt as to the assessment of a person amongst two, parallel proceedings can be taken against both and altern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee, the appellant in I.T.A.No.3/04, is a former Chief Secretary to the Government of Kerala. There was a search and seizure action under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act in the residential premises of the assessee on 15.10.96 and 16.10.96. Consequent on the search, notice under Section 158-BC was issued on 3.4.97 and was served on the assessee on 7.4.97 for the block period 1.4.1986 to 15.10.96. Assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 158-BC was completed on 29.10.97. In the said assessment, the undisclosed income of the assessee was fixed at ₹ 1,14,94,610/-. 3. In I.T.(S S)A. No.76/97 filed by the assessee, the Tribunal passed order dated 29.3.2000 setting aside the order of assessment and directing that appropriate orders shall be passed afresh, in compliance with the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the matter was reconsidered, assessment order dated 27.3.2002 was passed. In the said order, total undisclosed income of the assessee for the block period was determined at ₹ 1,11,42,021/-. This order was impugned by the assessee by filing I.T.(S S)A.No.10/02 before the Income Tax Appellat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the facts and especially in the circumstances of the case and the finding that the Samajam had pocketed some substantial amount by way of profit and indirectly it might have gone to the assessee, was the Tribunal correct in insisting on direct evidence to substantiate that the assessee received the benefit? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the undisclosed income from the purchase of land for the Sree Sankarachayra University of Sanskrit could not be assessed at the hands of the assessee? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and considering the preponderance of probabilities and the onus that is required to be discharged by the assessee and the failure of the assessee to discharge his burden the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that there is nothing on record to show that the assessee has received any amount from this deal , this amount cannot be taxed in the hands of the assessee and are not the findings wrong, against facts considering the proof required of and possible of? 5. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case; i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... who have gifted five or more sovereigns of gold, a reasonable estimation of 1500 grams of gold cannot be ruled out. Therefore, we allow the claim of the assessee to this extent. The difference is to be treated as assessee's undisclosed income. These conclusions are purely factual and no question of law can arise from these findings. 8. The other issue that was raised by the counsel for the assessee was regarding the order of the Tribunal upholding the conclusion of the Assessing Officer that the source of income of ₹ 3,00,000/- was not properly explained by the assessee and, therefore, the said income is the undisclosed income of the assessee. Insofar as this issue is concerned, reading of the impugned order show that the Tribunal, on appreciation of the facts, came to the following conclusion in paragraph 52 of its order: 52. Hearing rival submissions, we are of the view that the addition is to be confirmed. First of all it is to be seen that the letter written by Smt.Kalavathy was seized from the residence of the assessee, in which she express thanks to 'Sir' and Smt.Lakshmi. There is no reason to say that the conclusion of the assessing officer t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see and this led to the conclusion that if anything left behind, it should have gone to the brother, who cared, protected and looked-after the father at that particular point of time. There is no case that other brothers of the assessee had received anything similar to the gifts equivalent for the purchase of car. Considering the facts brought out on record and the explanations of the assessee, we are of the view that the additions were made by the assessing officer only after applying his mind. The mere fact that it has been reproduced verbatim of the previous assessment order does not mean that the assessing officer had not applied his mind. It is the duty of the assessee to explain the source of the money that came into his account. The only explanation of assessee's daughter that the demand drafts were purchased in the name of her father because it was easy to get the car on priority basis if it was booked in her father's name, of course, is an explanation to be accepted provided the source of the money was properly explained with such precision. It has not been done so. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that this addition made by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a University amounting to ₹ 20,87,200/-. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee in his capacity as the Vice Chancellor of the University entered into agreement with one Smt.Santhakumari on 4.3.96 for the purchase of 5.63 acres of land for a total consideration of ₹ 30,000/-. It is also seen that agreement dated 3.4.96 for the purchase of 87 cents of land for a total consideration of ₹ 2,39,250/- was entered into with one Suresh Babu and an advance of ₹ 2,00,000/- was paid on 2.4.96. Another agreement was also entered into on 3.4.96 with Smt.Dakshayani for the purchase of 1.29 acres of land for a total consideration of ₹ 3,54,750/- and an advance of ₹ 3,00,000/- was paid. Yet another agreement was also entered into on the same day with Sri.Manikandan for the purchase of 1.31 acres of land for ₹ 3,60,250/- and an advance was paid on 3.4.96. Similarly, one more agreement was entered into on the same day with Sri.Rammohan for the purchase of 3.95 acres of land for a total consideration of ₹ 10,86,250/-. Advances of ₹ 5,00,000/- each were paid on 4.3.96 and 4.4.96. It is found by the Assessing Officer that on the day when t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing a former Chief Secretary of the State of Kerala and the Vice Chancellor of the University, should not have entered into shady deals and relied on the principles laid down by the Apex Court in its judgment in McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer (1985) 154 ITR 148 to argue that the conclusions of the Tribunal are perverse, having considered the matter in its totality, we confess our inability to accept the contention. While the bonafides of the aforesaid transactions entered into by the assessee, during his tenure of the Vice Chancellor of the University are open to doubt, there is no evidence whatsoever to conclude for the Assessing Officer or the Tribunal or this court to arrive at a conclusion that the differential amounts mentioned above have actually reached the hands of the assessee to be treated as his undisclosed income to be taxed at his hands. In this case, although there are communications which are sufficient to suspect the bonafides of the deals that cannot take the place of all principles to saddle the assessee with the tax liability which requires proof of undisclosed income at the hands of the assessee. 17. In such circumstances, we are of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
