9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Addition of Rs. 5,000 based on nothings under the title 'Jakad' found in a loose sheet of paper. 2. Addition of Rs. 1,250 representing profit earned on the above. 3. Addition of Rs. 1,657 on account of nothings on page 3 of the scholar note book. 4. Deletion of an addition of Rs. 2,38,571 as assessee's undisclosed investment. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Addition of Rs. 5,000 Based on 'Jakad' Nothings: The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 5,000 made on the basis of certain nothings under the title 'Jakad' found in a loose sheet of paper during a search. The assessee argued that this addition was made without any basis or evidence, and alternatively, any addition made to the closing stock should cover any other deficiency. The Tribunal noted that similar additions were made in the assessment year 1979-80 based on similar nothings, which were retained because the assessee failed to establish that the goods belonged to someone else. Given that the addition had been retained in the previous year, the Tribunal decided that the benefit should be extended to the assessee for the current year, thus deleting the addition of Rs. 5,000. 2. Addition of Rs. 1,250 Representing Profit: The second ground involved an addition of Rs. 1,250 representing profit earned on the above Rs. 5,000. The Tribunal, in line with its decision on the first issue, deleted this addition as well, reasoning that the amount was already covered by the addition made in the earlier year. 3. Addition of Rs. 1,657 on Account of Nothings in Scholar Note Book: The third ground involved an addition of Rs. 1,657 based on nothings found on page 3 of the scholar note book. The assessee claimed that these nothings related to various trainees and did not signify any income or investment. The Tribunal accepted this argument, stating that even if it were considered income, it would be covered by the addition made in the previous year. Therefore, this addition was also deleted. 4. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 2,38,571 as Undisclosed Investment: The Department appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 2,38,571, which was made as the assessee's undisclosed investment. During a search, several documents, including an 'Anchor Note Book,' were seized. The IAC translated the entries and questioned the assessee, who admitted that the entries were in his handwriting but claimed they were for calculation and estimation purposes. The ITO, not satisfied with the assessee's answers, concluded that these entries represented unaccounted investments and added the amount to the assessee's income. The CIT(A) found the affidavit of Shri Padamchand Lodha, the assessee's brother, to be an important piece of evidence, indicating no material evidence from the Department to establish that the assessee had carried on any unrecorded business. The CIT(A) concluded that the Department's findings were based on surmise or conjecture and deleted the addition. The Tribunal examined whether the burden of proof was on the Department or the assessee. It noted that the notings in the Anchor Note Book, being in the assessee's handwriting and involving his brother, were within the assessee's special knowledge. The Tribunal found that the Department had not adequately probed the matter and had failed to establish any connection between the entries in the Anchor Note Book and the scholar note book. However, it disagreed with the CIT(A) that the Department needed to bring more material evidence, stating that the assessee should establish that these entries did not relate to his business. The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for re-examination in light of these observations. Conclusion: Both the assessee's and the Department's appeals were allowed. The Tribunal deleted the additions of Rs. 5,000, Rs. 1,250, and Rs. 1,657, and remitted the issue of the Rs. 2,38,571 addition back to the CIT(A) for fresh examination.
|
