TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1081X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO since it was included in the block assessment; which definitely was not permissible. We, hence, answer the said question in favour of the assessee. Return filed by the assessee for the assessment year 1993-94 being belated (and hence non-est) - Held that:- Government of India (Taxes) submits that the return filed belatedly is of no consequence and hence it has to be taken as undisclosed income. We agree with the said submission, but however, if the belated return is of no consequence, the undisclosed income has been returned by the assessee in a return filed on a notice issued after search. Hence, there is no warrant for adding on the income declared in a belated return. If at all, only ₹ 1,210 could have been added on being th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... INCOME TAX For The Respondent : APPELLANT : ADVS. SRI. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR. ) AND SRI. RONY JOSE JUDGMENT Vinod Chandran, J . The block assessment for the years 1993-94 to 1996- 97 has come up for consideration in this appeal. The assessee's premises was subjected to a search under Section 132 on 11.01.1996. Block assessment was made which led to a total undisclosed income being determined of ₹ 31,43,985/-. The assessee unsuccessfully filed first appeal, but succeeded in the appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The following questions of law arise from the order of the Tribunal, according to the Revenue: ( 1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, sinc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce the AO himself could have considered the same at the time of filing of the return on the basis of the materials recovered on inspection. The Revenue's contention is that the assessee did not show it in the return of that year nor the AO assessed it. That is the folly committed by the AO since it was included in the block assessment; which definitely was not permissible. We, hence, answer the said question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and uphold the deletion of the addition of undisclosed income of ₹ 16,30,925/- for the year 1996-97. 3. The second question relates to the addition of ₹ 51,210/- in the year 1993-94. In that year, the assessee had filed a belated return showing the income as ₹ 51 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lance was brought to tax as undisclosed income. The estimation carried out by the Assessing Officer in the subsequent years is also found to be reasonable. The assessee's drawings had also increased in the said years and on a reasonable basis, there was an increase in the house-hold expenses estimated by the AO. The Tribunal had deleted the same on the ground that additions have been made on an estimation basis. We do not think that the AO carrying out the block assessment is divested of the power of estimation which every assessment Officer carries with the office. In such circumstances, we are of the opinion that deficiency in the drawings for the years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 are to be confirmed. We also notice that there was an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
