|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 1281 Records
-
2014 (9) TMI 1228 - ITAT CHENNAI
Deduction u/s 80IA - initial assessment year - Whether earlier depreciation which has already been absorbed can be notionally carried forward and set off against the profits available for deduction under sec.80IA? - HELD THAT:- This issue has been considered by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sri Velayudhasamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd.[2010 (3) TMI 860 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] where the court has held that such notionally carried forward and set off past losses and depreciation is not permissible under the provisions of sec.80IA. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble High Court, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to compute the deduction available to the assessee under sec.80IA without any sort of notionally carried forward and set off past depreciation and losses
Whether carbon credit receipts are revenue in nature? - HELD THAT: This issue is also now covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of My Home Power Ltd.[2014 (6) TMI 82 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT]. As such, this issue is also decided in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to exclude the carbon credits from computing the total income of the assessee.
Eligibility of deduction u/s 80IA - HELD THAT:- This issue is covered by the decision of case of Sri Velayudhasamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd.,[2010 (3) TMI 860 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] in favour of the assessee and as such, these appeals are liable to be dismissed.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1227 - ITAT JABALPUR
Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - payments so made in respect of commission paid to sub-franchisees and retailers, on recharge vouchers, and other commission paid to retailers - HELD THAT:- As relying on Rajeev Kumar Agarwal [2014 (6) TMI 79 - ITAT AGRA] we consider it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, on the same lines and in the light of the above legal position. The assessee is directed to furnish all the relevant information and co-operate in expeditious disposal of remanded proceedings.
Payments which consist of amounts less than the threshold limit for invoking section 40(a)(ia), this aspect of the matter is essentially a factual aspect which needs to be examined by the Assessing Officer. We direct him to do so, and in case it is actually found that the provisions of section could not have been invoked on these amount, the very foundation of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) will cease to hold good in law. Let this aspect also be examined afresh in the above light.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1226 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Revisional order passed on a non existent company - Company amalgamated with other company - HELD THAT:- Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Spice Infotainment Ltd. [2011 (8) TMI 544 - DELHI HIGH COURT] wherein it is held that assessment in the name of the company which has been amalgamated with another company and stands dissolved is null and void; assessment framed in the name of a non- existing entity is a jurisdictional defect and not merely a procedural irregularity of the nature which can be cured by invoking the provisions of s.292B.
In the present case also the amalgamation took place vide the order of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court dated 17.04.2008 w.e.f. 01.04.2007 and this Company Aarcee Holdings Pvt. Ltd. has amalgamated with Padmavati Properties & Trust Ltd. and no revision order can be passed on a non-existent company. Hence, the very premise of the revenue that revision order passed on a non existent company does not stand. Also see IK. AGENCIES PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, KOL-III [2011 (3) TMI 690 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT]
Since, we find that the issue is a question of fact and/or a technical question, and not a substantial question of law, the application and the appeal are dismissed.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1225 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Process amounting to manufacture or not - credit of additional duty of customs, education cess, secondary and higher education cess and special additional duty of customs paid on the imported Polyurethane Resin - HELD THAT:- The Registrar (Judicial) / Registrar, High Court, Original Side, Bombay to ensure that the original record in relation to this Appeal is summoned from the Tribunal and offered for inspection of the parties. This paper book is treated sufficient for the purpose of admission of this Appeal. However, the Registry must further ensure preparation of complete paper book in accordance with the Rules. The Registry in the first instance must send intimation of admission of this Appeal enclosing therewith a copy of this order so as to enable the Tribunal to act accordingly.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1224 - ITAT DELHI
Addition being bogus/non-genuine/inflated fabrication charges relying on the last year’s order - disallowance was made being @ 2.5% on total Dying & Printing work, Fabrication charges and raw material expenses - CIT(A) deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- Similar relief granted by the CIT(A) was accepted by the revenue authorities and the matter was allowed to reach finality by not challenging the same in appeal. As noted that it is a factual issue and there is no change in the facts or in the legal position.
In these circumstances, and in the absence of any specific reasons for deviation of stand by the revenue authorities for this assessment year, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer was indeed not justified in raising these grievances against correctness of CIT(A)’s order. We, therefore, dismiss the grievances raised by the AO for these short reasons alone, and decline to deal with the merits of these grievances. The preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel is indeed well taken and we approve the same.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1223 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Grant of Bail - Bribe - allegation is that the Petitioner being high rank Officer in prestigious Indian Army offered bribe to senior most Officer of Indian Army - offence punishable under Section 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - HELD THAT:- At no stage, CBI expressed its apprehension that the Petitioner is abusing his position or exploiting his links with his ex-colleagues or had made any attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence. Generally, CBI investigates the cases which involves national and international ramifications or where people holding high positions of power and influence or political clout are involved and not the cases of the nature of petty offences. The case of the Petitioner should have been distinguished by learned Special Judge/CBI from other cases wherein learned Special Judge/CBI ordered the release of accused persons on bail who were not arrested during investigation.
Petitioner directed to be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹ 1 lac with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court, subject to the conditions imposed - Bail application allowed.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1222 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Winding up of Company - Petition filed by the appellant was dismissed on the ground that the power deed executed by the trustee is insufficiently stamped and the trustee has not produced the authorisation as required under Clause 10 of the Trust deed - HELD THAT:- Clause 10 of the Trust deed dated 27.12.2002 speaks about the action, proceedings and indemnification by the trustee representing the appellant as against the respondent. Clause 10.1 deals with the rights of the Bond holders vis-a-vis the duties of the trustee. As per clause 10.1, the trustee is not bound to take any action unless he is directed or requested to do so by an extraordinary resolution or in writing of the holders of atleast one quarter in principal amount of the Bonds then outstanding. Therefore, it merely speaks about the action that is required on the part of the trustee when it was sought to be initiated at the instance of the Bondholders. Under clause 9 of the Trust deed, the trustee may, at any time, at its absolute discretion and without any notice, take such proceedings and/or other steps as it may think fit against or in relation to the Company to enforce its obligations under these presents. Therefore, a combined reading of the above said provisions would make it clear that it is a trustee, who can represent either on its own or at the instance of the required Bondholders.
The appellant has raised a specific plea in the Company Petition that it has been filed both on behalf of the Bondholders as well as in its capacity as a trustee, as there was a breach of covenants and obligations under the Trust deed on the part of the respondents. Furthermore, the authorisation has also been produced. The respondent has not questioned the validity or genuineness of the said authorisation. Therefore, the learned single Judge was not right in rejecting the application on the ground that there was no valid authorisation.
The execution of the power of attorney is also not in dispute. As rightly submitted by the learned Senior Counsel, the Company Court ought to have impounded the document and send it to the Collector for re-validation. Even otherwise, a fresh document has been filed by the appellant. The genuineness and authenticity of the said document has not been questioned by the respondent - the order passed by the learned single Judge dismissing the petition on the ground of insufficiently stamped power deed is also liable to be set aside and accordingly the same is set aside.
Matter remanded back to the learned single Judge to decide the matter on merit after hearing the parties as to whether the Company Petition requires to be admitted and to be followed by appropriate consequential directions - petition allowed by way of remand.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1221 - ITAT MUMBAI
TP Adjustment - international transaction - computation of ALP on the basis of RoCE method - HELD THAT:- Tribunal cannot be taken as an authority in which it can be said that either Tribunal did not accept the decisions relied upon by Ld. AR of the assessee or a different proposition has been laid down as has been canvassed by the Ld. AR of the assessee. Therefore, the decisions relied upon by Ld. AR would be applicable to the facts of the present case.
Thus, table No. 2 reproduced in para 3.2 will be applicable and operating profit @ 3.81% of Total Cost relating to international transaction would be a sum of ₹ 36,36,787/- and if the same is added and reduced to the extent of 5% from the international transaction of ₹ 9,59,06,519/- then the-5% would be a sum of ₹ 9,11,11,193/- and +5% would be a sum of ₹ 10,07,01,845/-, which would be within either of the above figures as the ALP of the international transaction would be a sum of ₹ 9,90,90,510/- (₹ 59,59,06,519 + ₹ 36,36,787/-).
Even otherwise if the operating expenses are taken at entity level and operating profit is determined for ALP at entity level then ALP of the total sales would be a sum of ₹ 52,76,94,805/- as described in table-1 in para-3.2 reproduced above and the same would also fall within the safe harbour of ₹ 48,29,94,843/- and ₹ 53,38,36,405/-. Therefore, in both the circumstances the adjustment if counted only on international transactions of the assessee with its AE, then ALP would fall within safe harbour of +/- 5% and no adjustment would be called for. Accordingly, we order to delete the addition and Ground No. 1 is allowed.
Addition to deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - HELD THAT:- If consolidated account is taken into consideration then on 4/07/2007 and on 29/3/2008 the credit balance of the assessee with Dinurje was much more than the amount obtained by the assessee. Therefore, it cannot be said that any withdrawal made by the assessee from Dinurje could represent as loan or advance within the meaning of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The reason given by Ld. CIT(A) is also without appreciating the full facts of the case as even after drawing those amounts and giving effect to the trade transactions, the balance, in the accounts of the assessee with Dinurje, was in surplus. The withdrawal made by the assessee from her own credit balance cannot be treated as loan or advance within the meaning of section 2(22)(e). Moreover, the payee company is maintaining one consolidated account of the assessee. Therefore, the sustenance of addition is not justified at all and is not conformity with the provisions of section 2(22)(e) - Decided in favour of assessee.
Loan or advances given by Dinurje to M/s. Ace Divine Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. (in short Ace Divine), the assessee is a substantial share holder of both these concerns having around 70% share of both the concerns - Applying section 2(22)(e) of the Act this addition has been made in the hands of the assessee.In the present case the amount has rightly been taxed in the hands of the assessee who is substantial share holder of both the concerns and that is in accordance with the decision of ANKITECH PVT LTD. & OTHERS [2011 (5) TMI 325 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. Therefore, addition made under section 2(22)(e) to the extent of ₹ 1,48,37,352/- is up and Ground No. 2 of the assessee is partly allowed.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1220 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Royalty paid to the foreign companies - Disallowance u/s 40A - royalty was excessive or unreasonable - DTAA between the Indian Government and the Switzerland Government - Whether expenditure was neither excessive nor unreasonable, the same could not be disallowed u/s 40 A (2)? - burden as a justifiable and reasonable business expenditure and thus should be allowed under Section 37 - HELD THAT:- We dismiss the appeal following the reasoning and ratio of the decision in Nestle India Ltd. [2011 (5) TMI 566 - DELHI HIGH COURT].
-
2014 (9) TMI 1219 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Royalty paid to the foreign companies - Disallowance u/s 40A - royalty was excessive or unreasonable - DTAA between the Indian Government and the Switzerland Government - Whether expenditure was neither excessive nor unreasonable, the same could not be disallowed under Section 40 A (2)? - burden as a justifiable and reasonable business expenditure and thus should be allowed under Section 37 - HELD THAT:- We dismiss the appeal following the reasoning and ratio of the decision in Nestle India Ltd. [2011 (5) TMI 566 - DELHI HIGH COURT].
-
2014 (9) TMI 1218 - ITAT CHENNAI
Validity of assessment - non issue of notice u/s 143(2) or 142(1) - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon [2010 (2) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] and case of Sapthagiri Finance & Investments [2012 (8) TMI 523 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] the issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act is mandatory. In the present case, there is nothing available on record to show that the Assessing Officer had issued notice under section 143(2) or 142(1)
CIT(Appeals) cancelled the reassessment as not valid. We, therefore, by following the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, hold that the ld. CIT(Appeals) rightly cancelled the reopening as invalid. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1217 - ITAT COCHIN
Allowability of claim of bad and doubtful debts made in the return of income u/s 36(1)(vii) - HELD THAT:- From 1.4.1989, only the debts which is written as bad and doubtful is to be allowed as deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) of the act. It is the duty of the assessee to written off the debts and claim that it is deduction while computing the income. The provisions of sec. 36(1)(vii) has been amended by insertion of Explanation with retrospective effect from 1.4.1989 by Finance Act 2001 and as per this Explanation, bad debts written off in the accounts of the assessee shall not include in the provisions of bad and doubtful debts made in the accounts of the assessee.
Claim of the assessee that the bad debt was debited into the P&L Account and the same amount was reduced from the total loans and advances in Schedule VII in the balance sheet and it shall be allowed as deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act. In our opinion, the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision in the case of Vijaya Bank [2010 (4) TMI 46 - SUPREME COURT] and Kirloskar Systems Ltd [2013 (12) TMI 9 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] had considered similar issue. Being so, the case of the assessee is to be allowed. - Decided in favour of the assessee.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1216 - SUPREME COURT
Demolition of the allegedly illegal constructions raised by the Appellants - Scope of Government's order - interpretation of statute - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the exercise of executive power is traceable to Entry 13 and 14 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. The power to give effect to the guidelines and to penalize violators thereof may not have been available at the time when the guidelines became effective. However, with the enactment of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 with effect from 19th November, 1986, Sections 3 and 5 empowered the Central Government to pass necessary orders and issue directions which are penal in nature. It is in the exercise of the said power under the Act read with the guidelines referred to above that the orders impugned by the Appellants have been passed. Though the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification under the Act was issued on 19th February, 1991 and admittedly is prospective in nature, till such time that the said notification came into force it is the guidelines which held the field being administrative instructions having the effect of law Under Article 73 of the Constitution.
A Govt. policy may acquire the "force of 'law'" if it conforms to a certain form possessed by other laws in force and encapsulates a mandate and discloses a specific purpose. It is from the aforesaid prescription that the guidelines relied upon by the Union of India in this case, will have to be examined to determine whether the same satisfies the minimum elements of law - In the absence of due authentication and promulgation of the guidelines, the contents thereof cannot be treated as an order of the Government and would really represent an expression of opinion.
It will not be necessary to notice the long line of decisions reiterating the aforesaid view. So far as the mode of publication is concerned, it has been consistently held by this Court that such mode must be as prescribed by the statute. In the event the statute does not contain any prescription and even under the subordinate legislation there is silence in the matter, the legislation will take effect only when it is published through the customarily recognized official channel, namely, the official gazette - If the guidelines relied upon by Union of India in the present case fail to satisfy the essential and vital parameters/requirements of law as the trend of the above discussion would go to show, the same cannot be enforced to the prejudice of the Appellants as has been done in the present case. For the same reason, the issue raised with regard to the authority of the Union to enforce the guidelines on the coming into force of the provisions of the Environment Protection Act so as to bring into effect the impugned consequences, adverse to the Appellants, will not require any consideration.
The orders impugned in the writ petitions filed by the Appellants cannot be sustained.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1215 - ITAT KOLKATA
Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D - Grievance of the Revenue is that the ld. CIT(A) has held that when shares are kept as inventories disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is not called for - HELD THAT:- This issue is covered in favour of assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. vs JCIT [2012 (4) TMI 282 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] held that when the shares are not retained for earning the dividend income and the dividend income is incidental to its business of sale of shares disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is not called for. In this case also we find the ld. CIT(A) has held that when the shares were kept on trading account no disallowance us 14A of the Act is called for. We find that in such circumstances there is no infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A) in view of the precedence as above. Furthermore the ld. CIT(A) has given a clear basis for the computation of disallowance confirmed by him. The Revenue has not been able to point out any infirmity in the same. Hence revenue’s claim that the ld. CIT(A) should not have held that shares held as stock in trade do not attract disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is not sustainable. Accordingly in the background of the aforesaid discussion and precedent we uphold the order of ld.CIT(A) on this account.
Disallowance under the head Penalty - Sum paid to Stock Exchange for delay in payment of the dues - HELD THAT:- We find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an order following the decision of ITAT, Kolkata Bench. The Tribunal has clearly found that when sum have been paid to Stock Exchange for delay in payment of the dues and for various other obligations arising out of carrying on business activities, the penalty charges cannot be said to be for infringement of any law were paid to compensate for delay in payment of the dues to the Stock Exchange and for various other obligations. In these circumstances we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly we uphold the same.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1214 - SUPREME COURT
Government of India’s plan in fast-tracking criminal justice in the country - maximum period for which an under-trial prisoner can be detained - HELD THAT:- Having given our thoughtful consideration to the legislative policy engrafted in Section 436A and large number of under-trial prisoners housed in the prisons, we are of the considered view that some order deserves to be passed by us so that the under-trial prisoners do not continue to be detained in prison beyond the maximum period provided under Section 436A. We, accordingly, direct that jurisdictional Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Sessions Judge shall hold one sitting in a week in each jail/prison for two months commencing from 1st October, 2014 for the purposes of effective implementation of 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In its sittings in jail, the above judicial officers shall identify the under-trial prisoners who have completed half period of the maximum period or maximum period of imprisonment provided for the said offence under the law and after complying with the procedure prescribed under Section 436A pass an appropriate order in jail itself for release of such under-trial prisoners who fulfill the requirement of Section 436A for their release immediately.
The Jail Superintendent of each jail/prison is directed to provide all necessary facilities for holding the court sitting by the above judicial officers. A copy of this order shall be sent to the Registrar General of each High Court, who in turn will communicate the copy of the order to all Sessions Judges within his State for necessary compliance - the Home Secretary, Government of Jammu and Kashmir is directed to take immediate steps in respect of forwarding ’No Objection’ by the State Government to the Central Government for deportation of the prisoner-Hamid Numain Bhat, if it has decided not to challenge the discharge order. In that event, the ’No Objection’ shall be positively sent within four weeks. On receipt of ’No Objection’, if any, from the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, the Central Government shall take steps for his deportation as early as possible and in no case not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of the ’No Objection. Professor Bhim Singh, petitioner-in-person, invited our attention to the affidavit dated 16th July, 2013 filed on behalf of the Government of India by Mr. Vikas Srivastava in compliance of Order dated 08.05.2013.
List all the matters on 08th December, 2014.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1213 - CESTAT MUMBAI
Reduction in quantum of penalty u/s 117 of CA - Allegation of guilty of violating the Facility Notice - HELD THAT:- Perusing of copy of the Facility Notice No. 69/2011, it is found that it nowhere refers to the Section 141(2) of the Customs Act. Further, in the facts and circumstances, it is found that the show-cause notice is vague, as the gist of allegation and period is not found mentioned. The whole proceedings are vitiated for lack of proper show-cause notice.
Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1212 - ITAT KOLKATA
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - AO jurisdiction to issue notice - applicability of section 292B - HELD THAT:- Revenue has waited for the dismissal of the appeals by the ITAT and thereafter the revenue filed fresh appeals after delay of over 4 years. As a matter of fact even after receipt of the said order of the ITAT, the department has preferred appeal before the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta, but the same has also been dismissed. The plea that dismissal of appeal by the tribunal and the Hon’ble High Court can give a person fresh cause of action circumventing the limitation period prescribed is not sustainable. Hence, now the department cannot come forward and claim that there is a mistake on the part of the revenue for not filing proper appeals 4 years ago. Hence, the delay of four year cannot be condoned on the facts and circumstances of the case.
Already dismissed the assessee’s appeal on the count of lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal has also considered the argument that section 292B can not be invoked as fundamental infirmities are not curable u/s. 292 B of the Act. As a matter of fact, the condonation of delay in this case would tantamount to unsettle the earlier order of the tribunal, which is certainly not permissible as per law. Furthermore, it is noted that the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta has also dismissed the appeal by the revenue against the ITAT order. Hence, our action of condoning the delay of 4 years will also have the effect of rendering the Hon’ble High Court’s order as infructuous. This will be gross indiscipline on our part. Moreover, the case laws as relied on by the ld. Counsel of the assessee support the case of the assessee In these circumstances, in our considered opinion on the facts and circumstances of the case of the case the delay in filing the appeal over of over 4 years cannot be condoned. Hence, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed in limine.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1211 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
MAT Computation - provision towards unidentified motor third party claim - whether an ascertained liablity to be deducted while computing the book profit under section 115JB as held by tribunal ? - HELD THAT:- Since we find that the learned advocate for the appellant/revenue has no instruction whether for the assessment years 1997-98,1998- 99,1999-2000 and 2001-2002 any appeal has been preferred on the same point and since it is well settled that it is not open to the revenue to challenge the correctness of the earlier assessment years without a just cause and as there is no substantial ground before us to differ from the position of law for the earlier assessment years in question, we are of the view that so far as the first question is concerned, it is not a substantial question of law.
Disallowance u/s 14A - HELD THAT:- since it is admitted by the learned advocate for the revenue that it stands covered by the order M/S. RR. SEN & BROTHERS (P) LTD. [2013 (7) TMI 260 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] against the revenue, the said question is answered in the negative and in favour of the assessee.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1210 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Deduction u/s 10B - Whether the telecommunication expenses, insurance charges, personnel expenses, professional expenses, branch office expenses and other expenses incurred in foreign exchange should not be excluded from the export turnover for the purpose of computing deduction under Section 10B of the Income Tax-Act, 1961? - If the said expenses are to be excluded from the export turnover, then the same should also be excluded from the total turnover for the purpose of computing deduction under Section JOB of the Income Tax Act, 1961? - Assessee contends that the assessee were entitled to the relief even on the alternative ground and if it is not considered, it is likely that the finding recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) would stand, which may be held against them in future.
HELD THAT:- We deem it proper to remit these matters back to the Tribunal to record the findings on merit, even on the alternative ground also. We make it clear that while considering the said ground, it is open to the assessees to raise such additional grounds which they may choose so. Accordingly, these appeals are remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. All the contentions are kept open to be decided by the Tribunal. It is made clear that the tribunal shall also go into such other questions of law which may be raised by the assessees on such remand.
-
2014 (9) TMI 1209 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Unexplained expenditure of marriage of the daughter of the assessee - HELD THAT:- Under the provisions of section 158BC of the Act the un-disclosed income for the block period in the hands of the person searched is to be based on the evidence found during the course of search. In the case of the assessee a diary marked as Annexure A-7 was seized from the premises of the assessee and the said diary contained notings of various expenditure of various shoguns/gifts given to the near relatives of the son-in-law of the assessee. The assessee has totaled the said expenditure at page 4 of Annexure A-7 at ₹ 6,25,700/-. The assessee however, claimed that the same were proposed expenditure. We find no merit in the plea of the assessee in view of the fact that the marriage of the daughter of the assessee was solemnized and entries in the diary noted various shoguns/gifts given by the assessee. However, in all fairness, we restrict the addition to ₹ 3 lacs in the hands of the assessee.
Addition on account of marriage expenditure - HELD THAT:- AO rejected the claim of the assessee though a confirmation was filed with regard to the said gifts. The CIT (Appeals) had deleted the said addition. We are in conformity with the order of the CIT (Appeals) where confirmation of gifts has been filed by the assessee and it is customary that the gifts are received from the relatives at the time of marriage. Merely because the receipt was found from the possession of the assessee does not establish that the said titan watch was purchased by assessee. Accordingly, we delete the addition
Addition made on account of marriage expenses - CIT (Appeals) where the evidence in the form of invoices were found from the possession of the assessee and also in view of the fact that the marriage of the daughter of the assessee had been solemnized at Ahmedabad. The assessee in his statement had admitted that he and his relatives had traveled by air from Delhi to Ahmedabad for solemnizing the marriage of his daughter. Accordingly, we confirm the addition made on the basis of the evidence/invoices found during the course of search.
Addition on account of expenses on pre-marriage dinner at Chandigarh - AO in view of the list found estimated the expenditure @ ₹ 250/- per head and made addition of ₹ 75,000 plus estimated addition of ₹ 25,000/- on other arrangements like tent, lighting, etc. Thus an addition of ₹ 1 lac was made by the Assessing Officer, which was deleted by the CIT (Appeals). As pointed out by us in the paras hereinabove, this is the case of block assessment and addition can be made only on the basis of evidence found during the course of search. The present addition has been made on account of material list seized from the premises of the assessee, which in nowhere establish that the assessee had incurred the said expenditure. In the absence of any concrete evidence, we find no merit in the said addition of ₹ 1 lac and the same is deleted.
Addition on account of purchase of miscellaneous items for marriage - HELD THAT:- Addition as the papers depicted only estimated expenditure and in the absence of any evidence having been found of the expenditure being incurred i.e. in the form of any bills, receipts or payment slips, we find no merit in the said addition and we uphold the order of the CIT (Appeals) in deleting the aid of ₹ 33,025/-.
Addition on account of purchase of silver items/utensils - On the basis of Annexure A-12, page 20 seized from the residence of the assessee, which contained slip of purchases of silver items utensils at ₹ 29,800/-. The assessee failed to furnish any explanation and he same was added as the income of the assessee which was deleted by the CIT (Appeals). We do not confirm with the view of the CIT (Appeals) as the bills for purchase of silver items were found from the possession of the assessee and in the absence of any evidence to explain the source of investment, we reverse the order of the CIT (Appeals) and uphold the addition
Addition on account of stay at Ahmemdabad - HELD THAT:- Once the evidence of having incurred the expenditure has been found from the possession of the assessee and in the absence of any explanation as to the source of expenditure, the same constitute undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, we confirm the addition of ₹ 21,097/- and reverse the order of the CIT (Appeals) in this regard.
Addition of marriage expenses at Ahmedabad and other miscellaneous expenses - The perusal of the order of the Assessing Officer reflects that the marriage expenses at Ahmedabad have been estimated by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the statement of the assessee that 150 persons had attended the function. Further other miscellaneous expenses have been estimated being customs. Undoubtedly the expenditure claimed to be incurred by the assessee are related to the marriage function. The total addition on account of marriage expenses had been made in the hands of the assessee at ₹ 3 lacs. Assessee fairly admitted hat the ends of justice would be met in case the said addition is restricted to ₹ 1 lac. In view thereof, we restrict the addition at ₹ 1 lac and partly allow the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue.
Un-explained expenditure under section 69C - In respect of the first addition of ₹ 18,000/-, wherein during the course of search evidence of payment of ₹ 18,000/- to Shri Kimat Rai Garg was found from the possession of the assessee and in the absence of any explanation as to the source, the said sum is to be treated as un-explained expenditure under section 69C of the Act relatable to the block period. However, we uphold the deletion of ₹ 2000/- being petty expenditure
Addition on account of unexplained gifts - The assessee before us had failed to bring on record any evidence to prove any evidence of relation with the said persons or the occasion on which the said gifts were given to the assessee. In the absence of the same and as the assessee had failed to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the said persons, we uphold the addition
Addition made on account of jewellery found from the possession of the assessee - HELD THAT:- As per the instructions issue by the CBDT, the search team is directed not to takek into account the jewellery taking into consideration the total numbers of the family wherein credit of 500 gms of jewellery is to be allowed to a married lady and 100 gms of jewellery is to be allowed on account of the male members and 250 gm of jewellery on account of unmarried female. The said instructions have been applied by various tribunals in determining the value of jewellery in the hands of the assessee. The family of the assessee considered of self, his wife and two sons. The assessee further claimed that his mother’s jewellery was also found but it is the finding of the Assessing Officer that the mother of the assessee was not staying in his house and hence, it could not be assumed that any jewellery belonging to her was available with him. We are in conformity with the findings of the Assessing Officer in this regard. We direct the Assessing Officer to allow the benefit of 500 gms of jewellery in the hands of the wife of the assessee and 300 gms of jewellery on account of the assessee and his two sons and thereafter compute the disallowance, if any, on account of jewellery found from the possession of the assessee.
........
|
