Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (7) TMI 317

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... icles were found and seized by the Department. The books of account as per Annex.-A and A-1 were share certificates and debentures were found and seized. These books, IVPs and KVPs, share certificates allegedly belonged to this assessee. A statement of Sh. M.L. Jain was recorded on 6th Nov., 1997, wherein he accepted that these documents actually belonged to him. Thus, block assessment was made by the AO wherein various additions were made. The CIT(A), however, deleted various additions. Hence, this appeal. 3. The first issue has been raised in relation to addition for short cash of Rs. 2,87,800. This issue has been dealt by learned AO on p. 8 in para 15. The AO made an addition of Rs. 2,87,800 on the basis of the statement made by the as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... amount of loan she purchased KVPs. The AO made this addition because he was of the opinion that the assessee had invested his own money in the name of his wife. The AO worked out interest @ 15 per cent on an amount of Rs. 62,250 for the period from 20th Jan., 1997 to 30th March, 1997, and made the impugned addition. The CIT(A) deleted this addition. 7. After hearing both the parties and circumspecting the available records, it is found that this amount in relation to which notional interest has been added by the AO had been duly disclosed by the assessee in his books of account. Obviously, this impugned amount cannot be a subject-matter of addition in block assessment orders. Learned CIT(A) correctly deleted this addition and the same is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ated in reply to question No. 13 that the investment in these shares was made from his undisclosed money and, therefore, he surrendered Rs. 2,50,000, as his undisclosed income. The AO accordingly, added these amounts in respective years as stated above. 10. The CIT(A), however, deleted this addition by giving his finding in para 18 of his order. 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the evidence on record. 12. The undisputed facts of the case which are culled out by us are that the investment made in the purchase of these shares/debentures stood duly disclosed in the books of account maintained by the assessee. These shares were purchased prior to the date of search. The assessee had disclosed in a chart the respective s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . (ii). Without going into much details, the facts being almost identical to that of ground No. (ii), we dismiss this ground also as no notional income can be taxed as undisclosed income of the assessee. 14. The next ground pertains to addition of Rs. 1,84,045 in asst. yrs. 1988-89 to 1998-99 on the basis of simple estimates as nothing was found during the search to indicate any unexplained household investment. 15. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the evidence on record, we are of the considered opinion that when no incriminating document had been found during the course of search which could indicate any unexplained household expenses, no addition can be made on estimate basis in the block assessment. The learned A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ions. The gifts received by Smt. Madhubala Jain are also reflected in the respective balance sheets of the makers of these gifts. The respective amounts of gifts are debited in the books of account of the donors. In these circumstances, the statements recorded under s. 132(4) of the Act that too during the search proceedings when the atmosphere is surcharged usually and when the documentary evidence justifies the claim of the assessee, no such addition can be made in relation to these gifts in the hands of this assessee in the block assessments. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the learned CIT(A) has correctly deleted this addition. Thus, ground No. (vi) is dismissed. 18. Vide ground Nos. (vii) and (viii), the CIT(A) deleted the addi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates