2013 (12) TMI 424 - HC - Income Tax

Other Income - Held that - The said income has been disclosed in the name of other family members - There being no concealment, the addition was rightly deleted - The Tribunal has recorded finding that the income was not hidden from the Department - Decide against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding block assessment period; Addition of income in the hands of the assessee; Deletion of income shown by family members; Source of undisclosed income; Salary shown in the name of the son; Interference with block assessment order by appellate authorities.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in two connected appeals related to the block assessment period ending on a specific date due to a search and seizure operation conducted in Bajaj Group cases and at the residential premises of the assessee, a trusted employee of the group. The Assessing Officer made additions based on incriminating documents found during the search. The CIT(A) modified the assessment order, which was then challenged by both the Department and the assessee, with the Tribunal substantially confirming the CIT(A)'s order.

The memo of appeal framed several questions of law, including the justification of confirming the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding "other income" shown by family members of the assessee. The Tribunal found that the income disclosed in the family members' names had no concealment and was not hidden from the Department, leading to the deletion of the addition. The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that the income was not a result of the search operation and was not undisclosed.

The Department's counsel relied on specific decisions to argue that the appellate authorities were unjustified in reducing the assessed income. However, the Court disagreed, noting that the CIT(A) upheld the part of the assessment order based on account books and material found during the search operation. The Court found no error in the Tribunal's decision to delete the addition based on the facts presented.

The Court also addressed the reliance on past decisions related to Section 132(1) of the Act and the question of reasonable belief, emphasizing that those decisions were not relevant to the current case. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the appeal, stating that no question of law was involved, thereby upholding the Tribunal's decision and confirming the deletion of the additions made by the Assessing Officer.