9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Representative he could not controvert the above. Going by the reasons stated in the condonation petition as well as short delay of 14 days, we condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The First issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of the ld. CIT(A) confirming the action of the ld. AO in making addition of Rs. 1,50,10,000/- declared by assessee under Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 (in short 'VDIS, 1997') as income for the period relevant to assessment year 1998-99. 4. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, director and founder of SRM Group of Companies was engaged in multiple businesses like education, media and transport business. He was also founder member of a political party named ''Indiya Jananayaka Katchi'' and also a Member of Parliament. The assessee filed his return of income on 29.10.2001 admitting income from house property, profession of running a tutorial institute and agricultural income. The return was not acted upon as it was filed beyond the time limit. Later, a notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued and assessee has filed a letter to treat the return filed on 29.10.2001 as return filed in response to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de this issue de novo in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee of being heard''. In consequence to the above direction of the Tribunal, the ld. AO passed an order u/s. 143(3) rws 263 rws 254 of the Act dated 31.12.2009 and again repeated the addition i.e. disclosure under VDIS, 1997 u/s. 68 of the Act of Rs. 1,50,10,000/-. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the action of the ld. AO by holding that the capital account could be credited with the amount disclosed under VDIS 1997 only to the year in which disclosure was made. The disclosure was made on 26.12.1997 in the financial year 1997-98 and hence the amount to the assessed in the assessment year 1998-1999 and not in earlier years as claimed by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) noted that the credit of this amount of Rs. 1,50,10,000/- for the first time taken into capital account forming part of statement of affairs submitted by the assessee as on 31.03.1998. Therefore, according to the ld. CIT(A) the first condition that the credit is represented in the books of accounts of the assessee in the financial year 1997-98 relevant to the assessment yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rieved, assessee preferred an appeal before us. 6. We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Now before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that assessee declared an income of Rs. 1,50,10,000/- under VDIS-97 including investments, purchases and expenditure on 26.12.1997 under the scheme and paid taxes to the tune of Rs. 47,73,180/-. This declaration was not accepted by the Revenue for a reason that the last instalment of taxes were paid beyond the time limit prescribed under the scheme. Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the details of expenditure/ investments/ purchases as under:- FY AY Description Amount(Rs.) Upto 1989-90 Upto 1990-91 Construction of school building at No.32, Veerasamy street, West Mambalam, Chennai-33 27,60,000 -do- -do- Construction of office building at 2 & 3, Veerasamy street, West Mambalam, Chennai-33 4,00,000 -do- -do- Construction of hospital extension at No.68, Tambiah Road, West Mambalam, Chennai-33 6,00,000 -do- -do- Construction of building at Valliammai Nagar, Valasarawakkam, Chennai -87 3,00,000 1990-91 1991-92 Construction of office building ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l account of the statement of affairs as on 31.03.1998 is an entry made in the books of accounts of the assessee, which was not at all explained. As per the ld. CIT(A) assessee has not at all explained these investments/purchases/ expenditures. He noted that credit of Rs. 1,50,10,000/- is made for the first time in the capital account forming part of the statement of affairs as an 31.03.1998 represented in the books of accounts of the assessee in the financial year 1997-98 relevant to assessment year 1998-1999. 7. From the above, it is noted that assessee has given a complete narration that investments / purchases/expenditures were incurred from assessment years 1991-92 to 1997-98 amounting to Rs. 1,50,10,000/-. As pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the assessee that clarifications on VDIS 1997 vide question No.9 has clarified that the amount declared can be credited in the books of accounts or if there is no books of accounts in some other record, the year of credit is left to the declarant's option. This question to No.9 and answer reads as under:- Question No. 9: Whether under the VDIS, 1997, it is mandatory to credit the amount declared in the books of accounts, if so, in wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the capital account or not. .......................'' The assessee has already furnished necessary evidence before the Assessing Officer vide letter dated 17.12.2009, wherein he has furnished documents pertaining to expenditures, investments and purchases which resulted in the declaration made in the VDIS on 26.12.1997. 8. We have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. The fact that VDIS-97 of the assessee was not considered due to the fact that payment was made beyond the time limit prescribed under the scheme. Question in addition of the investment would arise the year of liability is to be determined included investments/purchases/ expenditure for the financial year 1997-98 relevant to assessment year 1998-99 for invoking the provisions of Section 68 of the Act. We noted from the facts of the case that none of the authorities below have brought out anywhere in the orders that the investments are made in financial year 1997-98 relevant to assessment year 1998-99, whereas assessee has tried to establish the fact that the investments related to earlier assessment years i.e from 1991-92 to 1997-98. We do not agree with the findings of the lower authorities that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Therefore, AO is directed to follow the ALV rate adopted as per the Chennai Corporation and accordingly, recompute the income from House property in respect of the above mentioned property. However, in the interests of principles of natural justice, the Assessee is allowed a period of time of 15 days of the receipt of this order, to produce any evidence related to the value adopted by the Chennai Corporation to the Assessing Officer, who shall, after due verification, consider the same and recomputed the income from house property as per law.'' We find no infirmity in the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and further direct the Assessing Officer to adopt the municipal value adopted by Chennai Corporation for assessing rental value. This issue raised by the assessee is dismissed as per above direction. 10. The last issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is charging of interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. We find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to charge interest as per the provisions of the Act. This issue raised by the assessee stands dismissed. 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on 23rd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
