2017 (11) TMI 131 - HC - Income Tax

Admission of investment made as undisclosed income during the block period - Set off against the above undisclosed income being realisation from debtors falling outside block period - Held that - Indisputably, the assessee has admitted undisclosed income for the block period at ₹ 12.87 lacs. The deduction was claimed by the assessee of ₹ 10,56,991/- against the above undisclosed income as set off being the realization from the debtors prior to block period. Obviously, the onus was on assessee to lead direct evidence to show that he had the said amount of undisclosed income available at the beginning of the block period. Apparently, the calculation made by the CIT (Appeals) while treating 25% of the total sundry debtors covered by unexplained sundry debtors prior to the block period thereby treating 75% of the debtors as outstanding, has no logical basis. We are of the considered opinion that the view taken by the ITAT that the ratio of unexplained debtors and creditors as at the beginning of the block period can be better determined by the ratio of disclosed debtors and creditors as per the books of account as on 31.3.96 being the beginning of the block period is logical and justified and thus, the same does not warrant any interference by this court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Addition towards the loan given to Shri D.P.Agarwal as on 1.4.96 being the first day of the block period - Held that - As noticed that sum of ₹ 75,000/- was taken by Shri D.P. Agarwal from the assessee in cash and it is also specifically mentioned that no amount was outstanding prior to the said transaction. There was no evidence furnished showing that the amount was advanced by the late father of the assessee and therefore, the bald assertion of the assessee in this regard has rightly been not accepted by the A.O. and thus, the addition made by the A.O. sustained by the CIT (Appeals) and ITAT is absolutely justified.

Summary

Issues:
1. Calculation of undisclosed income and set-off against debtors for the block period.
2. Addition of unaccounted lending and interest by the Assessing Officer.
3. Appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and subsequent orders by ITAT.
4. Substantial questions of law admitted by the court for consideration.

Issue 1: Calculation of undisclosed income and set-off against debtors for the block period:
The appeal arose from the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) concerning the assessment years 1997-98 to 2002-03. The assessee admitted undisclosed income during the block period and claimed a set-off against debtors. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim, stating that the income from debtors outside the block period was not disclosed in tax returns. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld part of the claim, treating a portion of debtors as outstanding and allowing a credit. The ITAT remanded the matter, directing the Assessing Officer to determine undisclosed creditors based on the ratio of disclosed debtors and creditors as on 31.3.96, the beginning of the block period.

Issue 2: Addition of unaccounted lending and interest by the Assessing Officer:
The Assessing Officer made an addition for unaccounted lending to Shri D.P.Agarwal and interest thereon, which was not included in the undisclosed income by the assessee. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld this addition. The ITAT also sustained this addition, emphasizing the need to consider the balance sheet of the assessee as on 31.3.96 to determine undisclosed creditors. The court found the addition justified as there was no evidence that the amount was advanced by the assessee's late father, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 3: Appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and subsequent orders by ITAT:
The assessee appealed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the Assessing Officer's additions. The Commissioner upheld some parts and rejected others. Both the Revenue and the assessee further appealed before the ITAT. The ITAT set aside the Commissioner's order regarding the calculation of undisclosed debtors and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for reevaluation. The ITAT upheld the addition related to unaccounted lending, leading to the current appeal.

Issue 4: Substantial questions of law admitted by the court for consideration:
The court admitted the appeal based on substantial questions of law, including the justification of deducting undisclosed creditors based on the ratio of disclosed debtors and creditors as on 31.3.96 and the addition of a loan given to Shri D.P.Agarwal on the first day of the block period. The court considered the arguments presented by both parties and concluded that the decisions of the ITAT were logical and justified, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the calculation of undisclosed income, additions made by the Assessing Officer, appeals before tax authorities, and the court's consideration of substantial questions of law, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal issues involved in the case.