2009 (9) TMI 4 - HC - Income Tax

Undisclosed income discloser of income after the date of search but before the date of expiry of return - assessee submits that income for the assessment year in which search took place, could not be treated as undisclosed income in view of provisions of Section 158BB(1)(d) of the Act Held that - There is no inflexible rule in any of the judgments that mere fact that time for return had not expired was enough to hold that the income disclosed after search could not be treated as undisclosed. Such interpretation is not justified even on plain language of the statute. Thus, it is not possible to hold that finding of fact with regard to undisclosed income is perverse

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 158BB(1)(d) regarding treatment of voluntarily declared income.
2. Treatment of various incomes as undisclosed income and taxation at a special rate.
3. Addition on account of a kitty account as per seized document.
4. Confirmation of additions without considering facts and evidence on record.

Issue 1 - Interpretation of Section 158BB(1)(d):
The appeal involved the interpretation of Section 158BB(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the treatment of voluntarily declared income. The Tribunal observed that the assessee's income was not disclosed in regular books of account and that substantial income could not have been earned in a short period. The Tribunal also noted the presence of significant cash and assets during the search. The assessee argued that credit should be given for income up to a certain assessment year and relied on judicial precedents. However, the court found that the assessee was not a regular taxpayer before the search, had not maintained books of account, and had not filed any returns before the search. Therefore, the declared income was rightly assessed as undisclosed income and taxed at 60%.

Issue 2 - Treatment of Various Incomes as Undisclosed:
The Tribunal confirmed the treatment of various incomes returned/surrendered as undisclosed income and taxed at a special rate of 60%. The assessee contended that corresponding assets related to the income were not allowed. The court examined the arguments presented by both parties and concluded that the Assessing Officer's decision to tax the income at a special rate was justified based on the evidence and lack of disclosure by the assessee.

Issue 3 - Addition on Account of Kitty Account:
The Tribunal confirmed an addition on account of a kitty account as per a seized document. The assessee challenged this addition, claiming the document was not related to them. However, the court upheld the addition, considering the evidence and lack of nexus between the assessee and the document.

Issue 4 - Confirmation of Additions Without Proper Consideration:
The Tribunal confirmed additions to the extent of Rs. 36,53,148 without fully considering the facts, evidence, balance sheets, income tax returns, and other records. The assessee argued that the additions were based on conjectures and surmises without concrete evidence. However, the court found that the Assessing Officer's decision was supported by the seized documents and other materials, leading to the conclusion that the additions were justified.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the appeal, stating that no substantial question of law arose in the case. The judgment emphasized the importance of disclosure, proper assessment, and adherence to the provisions of the Income Tax Act in determining undisclosed income and taxation rates.