9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s unaccounted for investment. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 17,15,733/- out of Rs. 33,62,633/- made by the Assessing Officer. The learned CIT(Appeals) ought to have deleted the entire addition made of Rs. 33,62,633/-. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have seen that the receipts amounting to Rs. 17,15,733/- recorded in the diary are all explainable and, therefore, the same could not have been confirmed by him". Ground Nos. 1 & 5 are general in nature. 2. Condonation: The appeal was filed with a delay of 381 days. Assessee has enclosed a petition for condonation of delay in which it was submitted that consequent to the search and seizure operati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vani at Nellore on 23-01-2008. Appellant is brother-in-law of Smt. P. Pavani and residing in own residence with Smt. Ch. Vanajakshamma. AO noticed that a note book had been maintained and the transactions in the diaries seized as Annexure - A/PVRR/Res/09 & A/PVRR/Res/PO/01 pertain to unaccounted transactions and brought to tax an amount of Rs. 33,62,633/-. In addition, an amount of Rs. 3,03,455/- has been brought to tax as 'unexplained' consequent to the report of special auditor. It was explanation of assessee that these transactions pertain to the firm, M/s. Pavani Estates and M/s. Pavani Constructions and prepared a cash book explaining the transactions post-search. AO, however, did not agree and made the additions. 4. Before the Ld.CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordingly, out of the total addition of Rs. 33,62,633/-, an amount of Rs. 17,15,733/- is sustained as unaccounted receipt of cash reflected in the seized documents, while the balance of Rs. 16,46,900/- was allowed as utilization of unaccounted receipts. 5. Contesting the order of Ld.CIT(A), it was the submission that all these transactions are explained by way of cash book prepared post-search, not only to the investigating authorities but also to the AO in the course of assessments. It was submitted that the entries have not been examined by the AO, which can be gathered from the assessment order itself. Further, when the transactions are explained, Ld.CIT(A), however, gave partial relief instead of deleting the entire amount. Referring to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by assessee to Smt. Vanajakshamma are also treated as assessee's unaccounted receipts. The cursory look at diary seized indicate that there are many transactions maintained by Smt. Vanajakshamma, which include her day-to-day expenditure for household. With reference to the moneys noted to have been given by assessee, obviously one has to examine whether assessee has source for the amount or not. If assessee explained that money is from the firm, simple verification of the firm's cash book would reveal whether there are sufficient cash balance in the firm's hands and reflect the funds flow. Moreover, when assessee explained that amount of Rs. 9 Lakhs was meant for purchase of cement that can be verified from the books of the firm, which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
