2011 (1) TMI 1110 - HC - Income Tax

Block assessment - Search and seizure - Value of stock - Held that - The evidence has to be taken along with other materials on record and the assessee s son Shri.Bosky had taken registration and is carrying on business in the shop and is returning income from the said business. Thus value of stock found at the business place at Kanhangad was rightly held by the Tribunal as not assessable as assessee s income - Decided in favor of the assessee. Regarding disallowance u/s 54E - Held that - The appellate authority on facts found that the building was constructed though in the name of assessee s wife, it belonings to him and so much so, the reinvestment of the sale proceeds in the house newly constructed entitle the assessee for the benefit under Section 54E - Decided in favor of the assessee.

Issues:
1. Revenue's appeal against Tribunal's order on additions and assessment cancellation.
2. Treatment of Rs.10 lakhs stock value as income based on statement.
3. Assessment under Section 158 BC for block period.
4. Liability of above Rs.2.4 lakhs in the shop.
5. Disallowance of exemption claimed under Section 54E for capital gain on land sale.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the Tribunal's decision on additions and assessment cancellation. The Tribunal had partly sustained the additions and partly canceled the assessment on various heads. The assessment was conducted under Section 158 BC for the block period from 01/04/1989 to 28/02/2000.

2. The main issue raised was regarding the treatment of Rs.10 lakhs, the value of stock found in the shop, as the income of the assessee based on his statement to the Income Tax Department. The Tribunal did not accept this claim as it was found that the assessee's son was actually running the business in the shop under sales tax registration obtained from the State Government. The son was filing returns for the income earned from the business, which was a crucial factor in the decision.

3. Additionally, it was noted that the shop had a liability of over Rs.2.4 lakhs, which the Assessing Officer had not allowed. However, the appellate authorities found this claim to be genuine, leading to the dismissal of the addition towards the assessee's income.

4. Another issue raised was the disallowance of the exemption claimed under Section 54E for the capital gain received by the assessee from the sale of land. The appellate authority determined that the building constructed on the land, though in the name of the assessee's wife, actually belonged to him. The reinvestment of the sale proceeds in the newly constructed house entitled the assessee to the benefit under Section 54E.

5. Since no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal's order, the appeal filed by the Department was dismissed by the High Court. The Court upheld the findings of the Tribunal on various issues, including the treatment of stock value, liability in the shop, and the eligibility for exemption under Section 54E based on factual determinations.

← Previous Next →