9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by him at rates between 12 per cent to 15 per cent. A search under s. 132 of the Act was conducted at the business and residential premises of the assessee, his sister concerns and other family members on20th Oct., 1994. During the course of search various loose papers/documents/books of account and cash were seized against Panchnama. During the course of the search operation under s. 132(1) at the residential premises of the assessee a sum of Rs. 5,61,389 was found. As no explanation was offered by the assessee, cash amounting to Rs. 4,25,000 out of Rs. 5,61,389 was seized. The assessee vide letter dt.14th Oct., 1997, was required to explain the same. In response thereto, the assessee vide his reply filed on26th Dec., 1997, stated that the cash belonged to different sister concerns of the assessee as mentioned below: (a) M/s Mittla Industrial Corpn. 1,67,778.96 (b) M/s Mittal Chemical Udyog 1,05,841.31 (c) M/s Sri Ram Ydyog 1,35,600.00 (d) M/s Ram Swaroop Dass Radha Kishan 5,581.50 (e) M/s Mittal General Store 93,063.00 5,07,865.00 5. The assessee further explained that during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Oct., 1994, of which the receipts were available in the house No. 96-97 with Shri Ravi Mittal and are in the seized receipt books No. 27,28,29. Rs. 90,912.62 represented such cash sales and Ughai which was brought a day earlier and available at the house. This amount as such cannot be considered as unexplained. Normally, the cash was being handled and sent to the bank by Shri Budh Kishore for different business concerns of the family. Therefore, at business premises only nominal cash required for day-to-day was being kept and balance cash amount was kept at the residence. Besides, cash of Rs. 27,296.34 was opening cash balance on19th Oct., 1994, as per the books of M/s Mittal Industrial Corpn. After leaving amount for immediate requirement of the business, the balance amount was available in the house. 11. It was submitted that likewise M/s Mittal Chemical Udyog s books were showing closing cash balance of Rs. 1,05,841.31 as on 19th Oct., 1994, whereas no cash was found at the business premises and none of the family members has claimed or explained the same to be with him. Normally, since cash was being handled by Shri Budh Kishore, the same was available with Shri Budh Kishor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f account. The books of account, receipt books, etc., which are under seizure of the Department, are sufficient documentary evidence to support the explanation tendered by the assessee. We confirm the order of CIT(A) and dismiss the Department s appeal on the first ground 14. The second ground of the Department s appeal is against the action of CIT(A) in deleting an addition of Rs. 1 lakh on account of foreign visit when the details of expenses were not explained during the course of assessment proceedings. 15. During the year under consideration, Shri Budh Kishore went toKoreaon23rd Sept., 1994and returned back on28th Sept., 1994. The AO vide his letter dt.14th Oct., 1997, asked the assessee to explain the purpose of the visit and total expenditure incurred on the said foreign visit. The assessee vide his reply filed on26th Dec., 1997, claimed that he had gone toKoreato purchase machinery for M/s Mittal Polyfil. It was stated that the money was drawn from M/s Ram Swaroop Dass Radha Kishan. The assessee further claimed that expenses incurred on the foreign visit were duly debited in the books of account of M/s Mittal Polyfil. 16. The AO pointed out that the assessee had not f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n record. The assessee s passport was seized by the Department, which corroborates his stand materially. We confirm the action of CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 1 lakh. The Department s appeal is dismissed on the second ground. 21. The third ground of the Department s appeal is against the action of CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 71,240 by treating the capital of various persons as income of the assessee. 22. During the course of assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1994-95, the Asstt. CIT Investigation, Circle Rohtak, had added back the following cash credits to the income of the assessee treating the same as unexplained: (1) Shri Prem Kumar (2) Shri Shiv Charan (3) Shri Satdev (4) Shri Gauri Shanker (5) Shri Ashok Kumar (6) Shri Om Prakash (7) Shri Paras Ram 23. The AO found from a perusal of the assessment records for the asst. yr. 1995-96, that the assessee had paid interest to the above persons. Further, there were additions to the capital accounts of the persons. Since the above said creditors were not considered genuine and treated as unexplained last year, this year also disallowance to the capital and interest paid thereon was disallowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for addition of Rs. 21,798. The deletion made by CIT(A) of this addition is confirmed and the Department s appeal is dismissed on the fourth ground. 33. The fifth ground of the Department s appeal is against the action of CIT(A) in deleting an addition of Rs. 82,290 on account of income from the estate of Smt. Ralia Devi, deceased mother of the assessee. 34. This issue has been adjudicated by us in our appellate order for asst. yr. 1994-95 in the assessee s own case. Following the reasons set out there in we confirm the action of CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 82,290. The Department s appeal is dismissed on the fifth ground. 35. The sixth ground of the Department s appeal is against the action of CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 84,000 on account of household expenses. 36. The assessee had not disclosed any household expenses in the return of income of income. He had contended that household expenses of Rs. 3,000 per month were incurred by withdrawals made by Smt. Meera Devi, wife of the assessee. Keeping in view the size of the family and the standard of living monthly expenditure of the family was worked out at Rs. 10,000 per month totaling to Rs. 1,30,000 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sheet as on31st March, 1994, found during the course of search operation. The assessee further submitted that during the asst. yr. 1994-95, the assessee was a joint holder of bank account No. 1548 of Punjab Sindh Bank,New Delhi. Before the AO, it was stated that the same had been owned by him during the course of assessment proceedings for the year under consideration with a view to avoid litigation. A revised trial balance including the said sum of Rs. 1 lakh on account of disclosure was prepared and attached with the reply filed on11th Dec., 1997. The assessee further submitted a supplementary trial balance to avoid confusion as per details given below: Liabilities (Rs.) Assets (Rs.) Income disclosed under s. 132(4) and credited to the capital account 1,00,000 --------- Loans and advances ------ 39,500 Investment in shares ------ 58,500 Through interest ------ 16,500 Deposit in bank 14,500 -------- 1,14,500 1,14,500 42. The AO carefully examined the submission made by the assessee. He pointed out that during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otal wealth statement submitted during the course of assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1994-95 over and above the capital and asset disclosed in the balance sheet as of31st March, 1994. Thus, explained the learned Authorised Representative the assessee by recasting trial balance brought the same to the actual/factual position that existed after taking into consideration the disclosed income of Rs. 1 lakh and the position as earlier shown on 31st March, 1994, was not inclusive of the said figures. The learned Authorised Representative has submitted that from para 11 of the order, it would seem as if there has been an accretion of cash in hand, loan and advances and investment in shares to the extent of Rs. 1,16,500 as on 1st April, 1994, as against these amounts disclosed in the balance sheet as on 31st March, 1994. In fact, the difference is not of Rs. 1,16,500 but the correct difference is of Rs. 1,14,500. It is submitted that the figure of difference under the head loans and advances, as on above date, has been worked out to Rs. 45,500, i.e., loans and advances as per balance sheet dt.31st March, 1994, were of Rs. 3,31,193. The difference between these two figures comes to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
