2012 (11) TMI 550 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained accretion in the capital account - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - Findings of the CIT(A) clearly demonstrate that requisite evidences were filed by the assessee in the form of copies of account and the movement of funds. The CIT(A) has examined the copies of account and relevant bank accounts and deleted the addition - no infirmity in the findings of the CIT(A) found - in favour of assessee. Unaccounted cash credit - Held that - The evidences under Rule 46A filed by the assessee, deserve to be admitted, with a view to further the cause of justice and, hence, the same are admitted. Further, the submission filed by the appellant that the parties are existing assessee and evidences filed by the appellant are sufficient, to prove the case within the meaning of Section 68 are to be looked into by the CIT(A) - issue restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in the light of fresh evidences - in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. Surrender of additional income - Additional income u/s 69B - Held that - If at the time of survey an assessee himself concedes that the stocks are short and even comes to an agreement regarding the extent of shortage, unless it can be established that such consents or agreement was given or arrived at under threat, coercion, undue influence, misrepresentation or wrong understanding of facts or law, it would bring all efforts put in survey operations to nought if the assessees are allowed to retract from whatever they had stated or agreed to at the time of survey. Thus in view of the factual and legal position it is held that the additional income of Rs.30 Lakh declared by the appellant on account of unexplained investment in construction of factory building of M/s Oscar Remedies is to be taken as unexplained investment and accordingly is to be added to the income of the appellant. The action of the AO is therefore confirmed and ground of appeal is as such rejected - against assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition of Rs. 14.40 Lacs by CIT(A) on account of unexplained accretion in the capital account.
2. Confirmation of addition of Rs. 9 Lacs by CIT(A) on account of credits from M/s Global Med. Surg. (P) Ltd. and M/s Phythochem Healthcare Pharmaceuticals.
3. Confirmation of addition of Rs. 30 Lacs by CIT(A) on account of additional income u/s 69B.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 14.40 Lacs by CIT(A) on Account of Unexplained Accretion in the Capital Account
The revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 14.40 Lacs made by the Assessing Officer (AO) due to unexplained accretion in the capital account. The AO had invoked Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to the absence of evidence during the assessment proceedings. However, the CIT(A) deleted the addition after considering new evidence provided by the assessee during the appellate proceedings.

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had sought comments from the AO on the new evidence and subsequently provided these comments to the assessee. The CIT(A) examined the relevant copies of accounts and bank statements, verifying the movement of funds. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings, stating that the requisite evidence was provided, and there was no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order. Therefore, the revenue's appeal on this ground was dismissed.

2. Confirmation of Addition of Rs. 9 Lacs by CIT(A) on Account of Credits from M/s Global Med. Surg. (P) Ltd. and M/s Phythochem Healthcare Pharmaceuticals
The assessee contended that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 9 Lacs, comprising Rs. 5 Lacs from M/s Global Med. Surg. (P) Ltd. and Rs. 4 Lacs from M/s Phythochem Healthcare Pharmaceuticals. The AO had initially made an addition of Rs. 16 Lacs for unexplained unsecured loans but accepted Rs. 5 Lacs from Shri Subhash Chander Garg as explained.

The CIT(A) granted relief for Rs. 2 Lacs from Law Medbros Pvt. Ltd. and Rs. 5 Lacs from Smt. Charanjeet Kaur, but upheld the addition of Rs. 9 Lacs due to insufficient evidence regarding the identity, capacity, and genuineness of the creditors. The Tribunal admitted new evidence under Rule 46A and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, instructing the CIT(A) to consider the new evidence and provide a proper and reasonable opportunity to both parties.

3. Confirmation of Addition of Rs. 30 Lacs by CIT(A) on Account of Additional Income u/s 69B
The assessee argued that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 30 Lacs as additional income u/s 69B without corroborative evidence. The addition was based on a survey conducted at M/s Oscar Remedies Pvt. Ltd., where the assessee, as a Director, declared additional income of Rs. 30 Lacs for unexplained investment in the construction of a factory building.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had voluntarily declared the additional income during the survey and did not retract the declaration. The CIT(A) distinguished the case laws cited by the assessee and upheld the addition, stating that the declaration was voluntary and not under coercion. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order and upheld the findings, dismissing the assessee's appeal on this ground.

Conclusion:
The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed, and the appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed, with the case regarding the addition of Rs. 9 Lacs remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.