9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertaining to the Assessment Years 1996-97 to 2001-02, whereby the appeals filed by the assessee have been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.11.2001 notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in the case of Shri Sajiv Vohra, Individual were issued for the Assessment Years 1997-98 to 2000-01 for the reason that various investments made by him did not stand reflected in the original returns filed by him in his individual capacity. He was required to explain the investment made by him in acquisition of plot and purchase of Kisan Vikas Patras etc. He was also asked to explain the source of deposits made by him in various bank accounts with reference to the capital brought forwar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a protective basis since the return had been filed in the status of HUF. 5. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who vide order dated 22.09.2004 upheld the findings of the Assessing Officer that actually there was no HUF. However, the protective assessment made in the hands of HUF was deleted. 6. In the individual cases, the assessee stated that the investments stood explained in the hands of the HUF. Since the Assessing Officer was of the view that investments have been made by individual and were liable to be considered in his case on substantive basis, he, therefore, made the additions in the hands of individual on substantive basis subject to ride ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities below, to the contrary. To begin with, the HUF returns were filed belatedly, only on receipt of notice u/s 148 in the status of individual. The deposits in question were made in the hands of the individuals and not with the HUF. All the bank accounts were in the names of the individuals, rather than in that of the HUF the source of these funds is also not proved to be any HUF. The bank declarations were also signed as sole proprietor and not as karta of an HUF. The column in these declaration forms apropos the capacity as HUF has, to be made pointed mention of, been left blank, showing the intention and fact situation at the relevant time. No material of the existence of any corpus of HUF funds was brought, either before both t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere allowed to remain, having not been appealed against. Also, huge gifts were received from Shri Vohra's parents, whereas loans were advanced to them free of interest. All this is gathered for the APB itself, constituting self-incrimination documentary evidence produced by the assessee itself, little realizing that these very documents would comprise evidence capable of working and being used against, rather than in favour of, the assessee. 8.13 To wit, the modus operandi of the assessee is self explanatory. Resipsa loquitor. It is merely by design that the status of HUF has been tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to be engineered by Shri Vohra, to suit his nefarious purpose of evading the tax which was the rightful and legitimate due of the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 3.2.1991. His wife is a qualified pharmacist, and after his marriage, his mother Smt. Bimla Vohra gave a gift of Rs.20,000/- in cash on 27.6.1991 to the joint family. and thereafter, he started running the wholesale medicine business in the status of HUF. He further stated that he continued to file his returns in the capacity of Individual, and thereafter, he filed his returns in the status of HUF from the Assessment Year 1996-97. Learned counsel also submitted that from the income of HUF, various investments were made which have been wrongly treated by the Assessing Officer as individual's income of Shri Vohra. Learned counsel submitted that the assessee has completely proved on record, the creation of HUF as well as the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ft made by a grandmother for the benefit of the entire family of her son and from the said amount, the son acquired the property and started doing business, the income from such property was treated as the income of the HUF. 11. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and going through the impugned orders, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by the ITAT as in our view no substantial question of law is arising from the order passed by the ITAT. In the instant case, though the assessee has taken the stand that after getting married and receiving the gift of Rs.20,000/- from his mother in the year 1991, he started the business in the status of HUF in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
