9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... India Pvt Ltd. 3. The learned first appellate authority is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,00,000 being the payment for purchase of agricultural land ignoring the claims that the appellant had sufficient sources to make the said payment. 4. The appellant Craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the above grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal." 2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that Search and Seizure operation u/s.132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted in the group cases of Sri Sri Gruhanirman India Pvt. ltd & Groups on 24-12-2014. The assessee filed his return of income for AY 2015-16 on 31-10-2015 admitting total income of Rs. 18,38,610/comprising of Rs. 12,00,000/_ under the Head "Income from salary, Rs. 6,74,205/- under the head "Income from House Property", Rs. 91,754/- as income from other sources. Another revised return of income was filed by the assessee on 31.03.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 68,77,220/- comprising of Rs. 12,00,000/- under the head 'Income from salary', Rs. 6,74,205/- under the head 'Income from House property', Rs. 51,30,366/- under the head 'Income from Business' and Rs. 32,648/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oath was recorded on 03/12/2015 by the DCIT, Central Circle - 2(3) and in response to Q.No. 9 the appellant categorically stated that the amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- found seized at his residence belongs to his son out of the receipts of SNR Nirman India Pvt. Ltd. Copt of the sworn statement is placed at paper book and relevant extract is as under: 5.3 Q. No.9. During the search proceedings on 24-12-2014, an amount of Rs. 17 lakhs was found and seized in your residential premises. Please explain the same. Ans: I stated in the original statement that it belongs to my wife which was received from her mother. But, actually this amount was given by my son out of the receipts of SNR Nirman India P Ltd. in which cash balance is there. The details of the cash balance in the company of SNR Nirman India P Ltd. will be furnished within 2 days. 5.4 It is further submitted in the case of SNR Nirmah India Pvt. Ltd a sum of Rs. 15.31.000 was added for the Asst.Year.2015-16 being the cash found and seized at the business premises of the said company. The appellant son Sri. Sunil Kumar Reddy is the Managing Director of the company and on the date of search he stated that his books of account c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer treated the entire amount as undisclosed Income of the assessee, and added it to his total income. It is the contention of the assessee's AR during appellate proceedings, that as stated by the assessee in the course of his statement recorded on 03-12-2015, Rs. 17,00,000/- belonged to his son. However, from the perusal of statement recorded at time of search, it is seen that the appellant had stated that the amount belonged to his wife, and was received by him from her mother. However, no evidence in support of this contention was filed, because of which, Rs. 17,00,000/- was seized. No evidence was filed at the time of assessment proceedings also. Now, at the time of appellate proceedings, the assessee's AR has tried to explain the cash by saying it is out of cash belonging to SNR Nirman India, and that the addition made in that case deleted, this addition should also be deleted. This contention, however, is without any merits, and is unacceptable. The whole story of the cash found belonging to SNR India is merely an after-thought, which has been cooked up, after drawing up the cash book of SNR India and finding that cash is available therein. Had the cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO as the assessee was unable to substantiate his claim that the cash either belonging to his son or belonging to SNR India or his wife by way of corroborative evidence. Even before us, the ld. AR of the assessee failed to substantiate assessee's case by way of proper explanation or documentary evidence. Merely, in the written submissions made before the CIT(A) in case of M/s SNR Nirmal India (P) Ltd. are not sufficient to substantiate claim of the assessee. The assessee has changed his stand on different levels of the proceedings. At the time of search and seizure operation, he stated that the cash belongs to his wife and at the time of assessment proceedings, he stated that the cash belongs to his son. Further, he stated that it belongs to SNR Nirmal India (P) Ltd. As per section 292C of the IT Act, it would be presumed that the money was belonged to the assessee. For the sake of clarity, we reproduce the section 292C as under: "292C. (1) Where any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under section 132 or survey under section 133A, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
