2023 (2) TMI 709 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 69A - search and seizure operation conducted u/s 132 - cash was found in the residential premises of the assessee - HELD THAT - As in course of assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to explain the source of cash found, however, the assessee did not comply. Even, Commissioner (Appeals) has sustained the addition by stating that the assessee has given a very sketchy and vague response. The assessee has not brought any contrary material/evidence before me to controvert the concurrent factual finding of the departmental authorities. Therefore, in absence of any cogent material brought on record by the assessee to disturb the findings of the departmental authorities, inclined to uphold the addition. This ground is dismissed. Addition u/s 69C - unexplained investment - as in course of search and seizure operation, jewellery was found in the residential premises of the assessee - HELD THAT - Undisputedly, jewellery was found in course of search and seizure operation conducted in the residential premises of the assessee. As could be seen from the observations of the departmental authorities, the assessee could not furnish any evidence or valid explanation to explain the source of investment in jewellery. Before us, no contrary evidence has been brought on record by the assessee for enabling me to disturb the finding of the departmental authorities - we uphold the addition. Ground raised is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal
2. Addition of Rs.1,48,000 under Section 69A of the Act
3. Addition of Rs.6,79,020 under Section 69C of the Act

Delay in filing the appeal:
The appeal was filed with a delay of 59 days, attributed to the COVID-19 restrictions. The delay was condoned, and the appeal was admitted for adjudication on merits.

Addition of Rs.1,48,000 under Section 69A of the Act:
Cash amounting to Rs.1,48,000 was found during a search and seizure operation at the assessee's premises. The Assessing Officer treated this as unexplained money under Section 69A, as the assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation. The addition was upheld as the assessee did not present any substantial evidence to counter the department's findings.

Addition of Rs.6,79,020 under Section 69C of the Act:
Jewellery worth Rs.6,79,020 was discovered during the search and seizure operation. The assessee could not provide any valid explanation or evidence regarding the source of this investment. Consequently, the amount was treated as unexplained investment under Section 69C, and the addition was sustained as the assessee failed to present any contrary evidence to challenge the department's findings.

Conclusion:
The appeal was dismissed, with the Tribunal upholding both additions under Section 69A and Section 69C of the Act. The general ground raised did not require adjudication, and the decision was pronounced on 17th February 2023.