9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (8) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been held to be sufficient to cover any other deficiency. 2.1. The second ground is in respect of an addition of Rs. 1,250 representing profit earned on the above. The third ground is in respect of an addition of Rs. 1,657 on account of nothings on page 3 of the scholar note book. 2.2. On behalf of the assessee, Mr. C.S. Aggarwal submitted that for asst. yr. 1979-80 the matter had travelled to the Tribunal and the Tribunal in paragraph 3 of their order that considering the addition of Rs. 11,500 and Rs. 39,000 these additions were being considered on the basis of certain noting as 'Jakad' in loose sheet of paper. The basis on which the addition was retained by the Tribunal was that the assessee had failed to establish that the goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the addition made in the earlier year and, therefore, no separate addition is called for. We, accordingly delete the addition of Rs. 5,000 as well the profit of Rs. 1,250. 5. In regard to the last issue, the assessee's claim was the nothings related to various trainees and did not signify and income or investment of the assessee. Even for this ground it could be said that assuming that it is an income it could be covered by the addition made in the last year. We, therefore, delete the addition made on this account. 6. In the departmental appeal, there is only one ground which is in connection with the deletion of an addition of Rs. 2,38,571 which was made as assessee's undisclosed investment. The facts of this issue are that during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Hence no transaction was entered into. Q. 19. What is the nature of goods unvalued? Ans. I don't remember the details. Q. 20. Can you show the amounts in your books of account? Ans, There were no transactions hence it was not recorded. The ITO being not satisfied with the answers given by the assessee came to the conclusion that these are unexplained investments represent stock not recorded in the books especially because it contained the name of Shri Padam, who happens to be the brother of the assessee and also the term 'seer' represented the share. The above order was served on the assessee and during the course of 144B proceedings the assessee filed the affidavit of Shri Padam Lodha which has been filed by the assessee at page 35 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ratanchand Lodha although the account was mentioned as 'Padam Lodha Seerkhata'. Hence addition of Rs. 2,38,571 is reasonable made to the income of the assessee". 7. The matter travelled in appeal to the CIT(A). According so the CIT(A) the affidavit of Shri Padamchand Lodha is an important piece of evidence. The CIT(A) was further of the view that there was no material or evidence with the Department which goes to establish that the assessee had carried on any business which has not been entered in the books of accounts and these represented such transactions. For coming to this conclusion, he had placed reliance in this Bench's order in the case of Gyanchand Dandia ITA No. 1062/JC/1972 dt. 30th Jan., 1980. He was further of the view that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d entries in Anchor Note Book do not reveal any similarity. He, therefore, submitted that addition has been rightly deleted by the CIT(A). 9. We have given very careful consideration the facts and arguments of the parties. In the Tribunal decision referred to by the ld. Counsel in the case of ITO vs. Ghanshyamdass Hassan and (1986) 24 TTJ 68 (Bom) on the basis of certain promotes seized from the assessee's premises additions were proposed to be made. The Tribunal referred to s. 132(4A) and also to s. 69. The ld. Members clearly pointed out that the two sections are entirely different. The former is only indicative that whatever is found in the premises of an assessee belongs to him Where as in the case of latter the fact that the investmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peculiar knowledge of the assessee in which case alone he is proving it even under s. 69. 11. In the present case before us, we are, therefore, to examine whether the burden is on the Department or on the assessee. Following the principle laid down earlier by the Tribunal it boils down to the fact that the noting as are contained in the Anchor Note Book and whether they relate to calculations or transactions not accounted for is within the special knowledge of peculiar knowledge of the assessee as it happens to be in his handwriting and it also contains the name of Padam, who is his brother and further he prays in his statement that there is a possibility that the entry, may be a proposal of goods received on Jakad. But unfortunately the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
