1991 (3) TMI 210 - AT - Income Tax

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of proceedings initiated u/s 147(A) for the asst. yr. 1981-82.
2. Merits of the alleged undisclosed investment in house property for the asst. yr. 1981-82.
3. Legality and merits of the addition of Rs. 88,559 as undisclosed investment in property for the asst. yr. 1981-82.
4. Legality of proceedings initiated u/s 147(B) for the asst. yr. 1984-85.
5. Merits of the addition of Rs. 2,26,000 as undisclosed income from land dealing business for the asst. yr. 1984-85.
6. Merits of the addition of Rs. 1 lakh as undisclosed expenditure in the marriage of the daughter for the asst. yr. 1987-88.
7. Assessment of income from SOP for the asst. yr. 1987-88.

Summary:
1. Legality of proceedings initiated u/s 147(A) for the asst. yr. 1981-82:
The Tribunal held that the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147(A) was invalid. The assessee had disclosed all primary and material facts necessary for the assessment during the original proceedings. The Tribunal found no rational basis for the belief that the assessee's income had escaped assessment, as the original assessment had already considered the cost of construction of the house and accepted it after detailed examination and valuation.

2. Merits of the alleged undisclosed investment in house property for the asst. yr. 1981-82:
On merits, the Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) had based their decisions on incorrect and multiple additions of the same items. The Tribunal found that the total of the bills was only Rs. 73,719 and not Rs. 1,04,000 as claimed. The Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 1,33,076 as undisclosed investment could not be sustained.

3. Legality and merits of the addition of Rs. 88,559 as undisclosed investment in property for the asst. yr. 1981-82:
The Tribunal found no basis or evidence to support the Revenue's claim that the assessee had made undisclosed investments in the purchase of land. The sale deeds showed that the transactions took place in May 1982, and there was no evidence to prove that the payments were made in the financial year relevant to the asst. yr. 1981-82. The addition of Rs. 88,559 was directed to be deleted.

4. Legality of proceedings initiated u/s 147(B) for the asst. yr. 1984-85:
The Tribunal upheld the validity of proceedings initiated u/s 147(B), stating that the information received during the search and from other parties provided a sufficient basis for the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings.

5. Merits of the addition of Rs. 2,26,000 as undisclosed income from land dealing business for the asst. yr. 1984-85:
The Tribunal found that the statements of third parties could not be used as evidence against the assessee without giving him an opportunity to cross-examine them. The Tribunal held that there was no legal justification for treating the transactions and profits of the four ladies as the assessee's undisclosed income. The addition of Rs. 2,26,000 was directed to be deleted.

6. Merits of the addition of Rs. 1 lakh as undisclosed expenditure in the marriage of the daughter for the asst. yr. 1987-88:
The Tribunal found no evidence to support the addition of Rs. 1 lakh as undisclosed expenditure. The addition was based on conjectures and surmises, and not on any concrete evidence. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the addition.

7. Assessment of income from SOP for the asst. yr. 1987-88:
The Tribunal found no justification for increasing the income from SOP from Rs. 4,200 to Rs. 16,708. The income from SOP was directed to be assessed at Rs. 4,200, consistent with previous years.

Conclusion:
All three appeals filed by the assessee were allowed, and the additions made by the Assessing Officer were directed to be deleted.

← Previous Next →