2015 (3) TMI 652 - HC - Income Tax

Cash receipt of ₹ 1 crores - deletion of the sum of ₹ 1 crores directed by the CIT(A) and upheld by the ITAT - Held that - We are of the opinion that given the fact-intensive nature of the matter, and - as noted by the CIT(A) - the rare instance where cash transactions were indeed reflected in the books of one of the assessees which had an intimate connection with the present assessee, any further enquiry would involve more weighing of evidence rather than interpretation of law. Barring exceptional cases where the findings are based on no evidence or after overlooking material evidence, the scope of appeal under Section 260A of the Act involves examination of substantial questions of law. We see none in respect of this transaction. - Decided against revenue. Unexplained expenditure - unexplained loan - amounts were based upon seizure of handwritten notes containing particulars of demands made by the assessee - CIT(A) confirmed part addition on unexplained loan and deleted on unexplained expenditure - Held that - The CIT(A) subjected the record to close scrutiny and the ITAT thereafter went into the record by examining the actual entries. It is not as if the ITAT deleted the entire amount. The rationale for retaining ₹ 6.93 lakhs has been clearly mentioned, i.e. that it pertained to a specific transaction for which a date was attributable or discernable. However, with respect to the other notings, no definitive date or period could be ascribed. Therefore, the ITAT concluded that the said amount of ₹ 44,47,500/- could not be brought to tax . No substantial questions of law - Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deletion of the sum of Rs. 1 crore directed by CIT(A) and upheld by ITAT.
2. Addition of Rs. 44,47,500 during block assessment.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Deletion of Rs. 1 crore directed by CIT(A) and upheld by ITAT:
The appeals involved the Revenue disputing the order of the ITAT affirming the CIT(A)'s findings regarding certain amounts added during block assessment proceedings by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO had added Rs. 107 lakhs under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, related to unexplained purchase of residential property. The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeals, affirming additions of Rs. 39,47,500 under Section 69C and Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 69. The key contention was the deletion of Rs. 1 crore directed by CIT(A) and upheld by ITAT. The AO concluded that the value of a property purchased was not truly disclosed, considering statements and materials gathered during search operations. The CIT(A) analyzed additional documents and found substantial evidence supporting the assessee's bonafide transactions. The ITAT upheld the deletion based on entries in the cash book and balance sheet of a company related to the transaction. The Court held that the matter was fact-intensive, and no substantial legal question arose, dismissing the appeals.

Issue 2: Addition of Rs. 44,47,500 during block assessment:
The block assessment resulted in an addition of Rs. 44,47,500 based on seizure of handwritten notes containing particulars of demands made by the assessee. The amounts included various transactions like advances, payments, loans, and expenditures. The CIT(A) confirmed a part of the addition and deleted the rest. The ITAT observed inconsistencies in the seized notes, with unclear indications of payments or estimates. It noted the absence of specific dates and attributed amounts to particular years. The ITAT affirmed the addition of Rs. 6.93 lakhs due to a clear date associated with the transaction but deleted the rest of the amount as no specific attribution could be made. The Court agreed with the ITAT's factual analysis, finding no substantial legal questions to entertain the appeals, which were consequently dismissed.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues of deletion of a significant sum and additions during block assessment, emphasizing factual scrutiny and lack of substantial legal questions for appeal consideration.