9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able ornaments and bullion were found both at the shop as well as at the residence, some of which were also seized. Besides the above, the officers also seized a cash book in the search. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) referred to it as a Kachchi cash book. The reading by the Tribunal of the cash book did not lead to any such conclusion. According to the Tribunal, it was a normal cash book, except with the interpolations, which will be discussed a little later. 4. In the course of assessment proceedings, the Income-tax Officer found several abnormal features in the maintenance of the books of account as well as in the activities of the assessee. He found that the assessee had disclosed a profit of Rs. 19,714 on the sale of silver ornaments of Rs. 35,211. In the immediate preceding year, the profit shown was Rs. 15,473 on the sales of Rs. 21,043. He, however, found that the assessee had made purchases of silver ornaments of Rs. 1,92,066 in the year under appeal as against the purchases of only Rs. 19,231 in the earlier year. To him, this appeared to be abnormal, particularly when the sales in the year amounted to only Rs. 35,211. The closing stock disclosed in the year und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ced, some of these parties were also examined by the Income-tax Officer. They had invariably, except some, stated that they held certain agricultural land and they had deposited their savings with the assessee. In the case of Smt. Lalmani Devi, it was submitted, which was supported by her affidavit, that she had sold land from 1970 to 1973, and the sale proceeds had been deposited with the assessee in two credits of Rs. 8,000 and Rs. 5,000 on February 13, 1976 and February 14, 1976. It appears she was a pardanashin lady. Request was made for her examination on commission, which was probably not accepted by the Income-tax Officer. The Income-tax Officer did not believe the story of the assessee that it had borrowed Rs. 90,000. According to him, none of the parties was in a position to have any amount to make deposits with the assessee. In the case of Smt. Lalmani Devi, according to the Income-tax Officer, it was not possible to believe that she could make deposits in 1976 out of the sale proceeds of land made from 1970 to 1971. He also found that the affidavits given by the parties were stereotyped giving somewhat similar narrations. Some of them, of course in their examinations by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epted the genuineness of the ornaments taken on approval from the two Lucknow and Mathura parties. He finally deleted the addition of Rs. 1,13,914. 10. The Department came in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the above deletion. The Tribunal dealt with the matter in paragraphs 24 to 27 of its order in the following words : "24. We have carefully considered the submissions placed before us. Section 132(4A) of Income-tax Act, 1961, no doubt creates a presumption that the content of the books of account and other documents found in the search are true, but that presumption is rebuttable. In our opinion, it has been rebutted by the Department in the present case. We have ourselves examined the cash book found in the search very carefully and closely. We are clearly of the opinion that the entries relating to the borrowings as well as for the purchases of the silver and for ornaments have been subsequently interpolated in the cash book at the space left at the time of its original writing. The entries have been somehow or other filled in a crude manner in the left space had in different handwriting. On the one hand, the various amounts, as mentioned in paragraph 27 of the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the reasons stated above, we are in agreement with the findings of the Income-tax Officer that the entries in the cash book cannot be relied upon. The question then arises whether independent of the cash book, the assessee's explanation that it had received various amounts aggregating Rs. 90,000 from different parties or the alleged purchase of silver and/or ornaments of the value of Rs. 95,000 together with the receipt of ornaments of the value of Rs. 43,000 on approval could be believed. Here also we are in agreement with the findings of the Income-tax Officer. We have perused his order thoroughly. He has dealt with the affidavits of the alleged creditors as well as their statements. Some of them were also not produced before the Income-tax Officer. We did not agree with the stand of the assessee that Smt. Lalmani Devi could not be produced before the Income-tax Officer as she was a pardanashin lady. We wonder how she could go to the oath Commissioner or Notary for swearing the affidavit in the state of affairs. The answer is obvious that the assessee avoided her production before the Income-tax Officer for cross-examination. We agree with the finding of the Income-tax Officer th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
