TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1879X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities as well as the loose papers impounded during the course of search we observe that and list of tentative invitees were 1589 persons but in the very same set of seized documents at item 15 of BS-1 there was invoice dated 18.2.2004 for printing of 1000 invitation card. Further the proof of payment to the caterers were also part of seized records. The addition made by Ld. A.O seems to be merely estimated because other than the list of invitees no other material evidence was unearthed by the search team which could prove that 1589 invitees attended the ceremony. Therefore in absence of no other evidence placed before us by the Revenue authorities and in the given facts and circumstances of the case it will not be justified to sus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rious seized documents. After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. A.O completed the assessment making additions towards unexplained gift of ₹ 5,00,000/-, unexplained marriage gifts at ₹ 1,25,500/- and unexplained expenses in marriage u/s 69C at ₹ 12,19,550/- and assessed total income at ₹ 19,99,548/- Against these additions assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. 3. Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising following grounds of appeal; 1. That the Learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the addition of ₹ 5,00,000/- made by the AO in the appellant income u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of alleged gi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plaining the entries in his own bank account. If the appellant claims that the bank deposits were not result of gifts than it was absolutely his responsibility to explain the source of such deposits. The appellant is director company Rajant Gems Jewellers Pvt. Ltd and therefore the owning of the amount of gift by the company has neither much relevance nor any credence. Since, the appellant has failed to explain the source of deposits in his bank account, the action of the AO in making the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- is found perfectly in order. Accordingly, the addition is made by the AO is confirmed and this ground of appeal of the appellant is dismissed . 6. After examining the facts of the instant case we find that the assessee i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd page 1 to 97 of BS-12 list of tentative invitees were 1589 persons but in the very same set of seized documents at item 15 of BS-1 there was invoice dated 18.2.2004 for printing of 1000 invitation card. Further the proof of payment to the caterers were also part of seized records. The addition made by Ld. A.O seems to be merely estimated because other than the list of invitees no other material evidence was unearthed by the search team which could prove that 1589 invitees attended the ceremony. Therefore in absence of no other evidence placed before us by the Revenue authorities and in the given facts and circumstances of the case it will not be justified to sustain the estimated addition u/s 69C of the Act merely on the basis of list of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
