TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n made on account of the same. The grounds raised by the assessee are, therefore, allowed. - ITA No.773/Chd/2014 - - - Dated:- 16-12-2016 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri Vineet Krishan For The Respondent : Shri Sushil Kumar, CIT DR ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)(Central), Gurgaon dated 6.6.2014 relating to assessment year 2008-09. 2. Brief facts relating to the case are that search was conducted on the residential premises of the assessee on 28.11.2007. Cash amounting to ₹ 4,75,000/- and some incriminating documents were seized. No disclosure was made by the assessee while recording statement during the search operation. On 30.11.2007, the assessee surrendered the following, by way of letter addressed to the DDIT(Investigation), Panchkula : a) ₹ 10 lacs to cover discrepancies in documents seized. b) ₹ 6,30,000/- on account of amount invested by the wife in shares, mutual funds, units etc. 3. Thus, a total surrender of ₹ 16,3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y him as also the addition made on the basis of incriminating documents found during the course of search. 7. Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee contended that the retraction was valid since the surrender had been made under pressure and further since no incriminating documents as such were found to support the addition. The learned counsel for the assessee stated that all documents found were totally explained before the Ld. CIT (Appeals) and, therefore, the retraction was valid for this reason also. 8. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, stated that since no evidence of exercise of coercion or undue pressure has been brought on record the arguments of the assessee cannot be accepted. The Ld. DR stated that the fact that retraction took place 11 months after the surrender itself, makes the retraction invalid. The Ld. DR relied upon the following case laws in support of its above contentions : a) Navdeep Dhingra Vs. CIT, 56 TAxmann.com 75 (P H) b) B.Kishore Kumar Vs. DCIT 52 Taxmann.com 449 (Mad) c) B.Kishore Kumar Vs. DCIT 62 Taxmann.com 215 (SC) 9. We have heard the learned representatives of both the parties, perused the findings of the authorities be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we find is misplaced since in that case the Hon ble court had found that there was a clear and categorical admission of undisclosed income which was not demonstrated as incorrect or mistake of fact and therefore was held to constitute a good piece of evidence. 16. Having said so, this ratio has to be applied to the facts of the present case. We find that the contention of the assessee that the surrender was made under coercion, is unacceptable as held by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) also. It is true that the assessee has not been able to demonstrate the existence of any coercion or pressure while making the surrender. In fact, as rightly pointed out by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) the assessee has made the surrender two days after conclusion of the search and not during the continuation of search. While the search was conducted on 20.11.2007, the assessee had made surrender vide letter dated 30.11.2007. The assessee has not demonstrated, least of all with any evidence, as to how after the search team had left, pressure was exercised on him to make the surrender. If at all there was any pressure, the assessee ought to have brought the same to the notice of the Department immediately after the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 43 Paid by Ashwani Bansal 43,44 In the case of the appellant the addition has been made only on the basis of the alleged surrender and not on the basis of the evidence or material gathered during the search/seizure operations. The Id. Assessing Officer has alleged at page number 11 and 12 of the assessment order that incriminating documents were found during the search operations but no such document has been pointed out. The annexure A-2 to which the Id. Assessing Officer has referred to at page 12 of the assessment order are not incriminating documents and most of the transactions pertain to earlier assessment years. The Assessing Officer has alleged that the appellant incurred expenses in cash. There is no bar/restriction under the Income Tax Act that personal expenses cannot be incurred in cash. The only thing which the Assessing Officer can probe is the source of such expense. In the case of the appellant for each expense incurred he had sufficient cash and was incurred after making withdrawal from bank. The documents/expenses mentioned at page number 11 and 12 of assessment order pertaining to annexure A-2 page ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- on 17.06.2006 as fees in Mayo College. These amounts have been withdrawn by the assessee from his saving bank account No. 18091 with Andhra Bank, Sector 17, Chandigarh. The details of which are attached as Annexure-V. The transactions do not pertain to A.Y. 2008-09. The copy of the document and copy of bank account from where the withdrawals were made are attached. Each and every expense has source duly supported by evidence in the shape of withdrawal from bank account. There is no transaction which remained unexplained. In view of the above submissions it is humbly prayed that the addition of ₹ 16,33,000/- made by the assessing may kindly deleted. 19. The Ld. DR, we find has not controverted the above facts. Clearly, what emerges from the above therefore, is that the documents at Annexure A-2 pages 4, 5, and 6 do not relate to the year at all. Therefore, for this reason alone, they cannot be treated as incriminating documents for the purpose of making addition or even surrender for the year. As for documents at Annexure-2, page 3 though undeniably the same pertains to the impugned year, it has been explained as having been paid by Mr.Ashwani Bansal, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
