2013 (12) TMI 608 - HC - Income Tax

Gold biscuits found during search - Held that - The two gold biscuits recovered from the locker of the assessee were not owned by Shri Ashok Kumar Varshney at the time of recording his statement while making declaration/surrender of undisclosed income - So far as the slip A-4 is concerned, the Income tax authorities recorded findings that the assessee has tried to get the benefit of that addition in his hands without sufficient evidence - The details recorded in the slip A-4 were the investment and not the actual quantity of gold, which was recovered from the locker of the assessee - There is no substantial question of law - Decided against the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of affidavit under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule, 1961.
2. Addition of Rs.2,89,693/- on account of two gold biscuits in the hands of the appellant.

Issue 1: Rejection of Affidavit under Rule 46A:
The appellant contested the rejection of an affidavit filed by Shri Ashok Kumar Varshney under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule, 1961. The appellant argued that the affidavit should have been admitted, citing previous judgments. However, the court found that the appellant failed to provide sufficient cause for not producing the affidavit before the Assessing Officer (A.O.). The court upheld the rejection, emphasizing that Rule 46A (1) mandates showing sufficient cause for not producing evidence before the A.O.

Issue 2: Addition of Rs.2,89,693/- on Account of Two Gold Biscuits:
The dispute centered on the ownership of two gold biscuits found in the appellant's locker. The authorities did not accept the appellant's explanation that the gold belonged to his sister. The appellant's counsel argued that the gold was intended for the sister and explained the source of investment. However, all authorities, including the AO, CIT (A), and ITAT, found inconsistencies in the appellant's submissions. The court noted that Shri Ashok Kumar Varshney did not claim ownership of the gold biscuits during the search operation. The court held that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claim. The court concluded that the findings of the Income Tax authorities were factual and did not raise any legal question for consideration. Consequently, the court dismissed the Income Tax Appeal.

In summary, the High Court dismissed the Income Tax Appeal concerning the rejection of an affidavit under Rule 46A and the addition of Rs.2,89,693/- on account of two gold biscuits, as the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claims, and the authorities' findings were deemed factual, not raising any legal questions for consideration.