TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income available at the beginning of the block period. Apparently, the calculation made by the CIT (Appeals) while treating 25% of the total sundry debtors covered by unexplained sundry debtors prior to the block period thereby treating 75% of the debtors as outstanding, has no logical basis. We are of the considered opinion that the view taken by the ITAT that the ratio of unexplained debtors and creditors as at the beginning of the block period can be better determined by the ratio of disclosed debtors and creditors as per the books of account as on 31.3.96 being the beginning of the block period is logical and justified and thus, the same does not warrant any interference by this court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... towards purchase of various assets, the total whereof was worked out by the assessee himself at ₹ 12,87,794/-. The assessee admitted the details of investment made as representing his undisclosed income during the block period. The assessee claimed an amount of ₹ 10,56,991/- as set off against the above undisclosed income being realisation from debtors falling outside block period. The Assessing Officer ( A.O. ) rejected the claim observing that these debtors never suffered any taxation and the claim of set off in the form of income of ₹ 10,56,991/- earned prior to block period is not admissible because the same was never disclosed in I.T. Returns nor suffered taxation. That apart, an addition of ₹ 75,000/- in the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Aggrieved by the order passed by the CIT (Appeals) as aforesaid, the Revenue as also the assessee preferred appeals before the ITAT. The ITAT arrived at the finding that the calculation made by the CIT (Appeals) has no logic and opined that the ratio of unexplained debtors and creditors as at the beginning of the block period can be better determined by the ratio of disclosed debtors and creditors as per the books of account as on 31.3.96 being the beginning of the block period and accordingly, while setting aside the order passed by the A.O. in this regard, remanded the matter with the directions to A.O. to determine the amount available at the beginning of the block period from the undisclosed opening debtors, clarifying that the balanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.O. must calculate the figures of increase in investment or assets during the block period and for this purpose, the A.O. is expected to give due credit or reduction of investment standing on the opening day of the block period and thus, the A.O. and the ITAT have seriously erred in not reducing the amount being opening debtors of ₹ 10,56,991/- as on 1.4.96. Learned counsel contended that the ITAT has erred in partly allowing the appeal preferred by the Revenue and setting aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) allowing rebate of ₹ 7,92,743/- on account of estimated debtors as on 1.4.96. Learned counsel contended that the ITAT has erred in upholding the addition of ₹ 75,000/- loan given to Shri D.P.Agarwal on 1.4.96. Learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aimed by the assessee of ₹ 10,56,991/- against the above undisclosed income as set off being the realization from the debtors prior to block period. Obviously, the onus was on assessee to lead direct evidence to show that he had the said amount of undisclosed income available at the beginning of the block period. Apparently, the calculation made by the CIT (Appeals) while treating 25% of the total sundry debtors covered by unexplained sundry debtors prior to the block period thereby treating 75% of the debtors as outstanding, has no logical basis. We are of the considered opinion that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the view taken by the ITAT that the ratio of unexplained debtors and creditors as at the begin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
