9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts of the case are that a search was conducted under Section 132 on 30.1.2004 at the premises of the assessee which is managed by Shri Atul Kumar Bansal and Shri Deepak Khandelwal, being directors of the company. The search revealed that Shri Atul Kumar Bansal and Shri Deepak Khandelwal were conducting business in the names of various fictitious concerns besides the assessee and they were operating number of bank accounts of these various concerns. During search operation, it was found that there were huge deposits in bank accounts of the various fictitious concerns. Shri Atul Kumar Bansal operated these bank accounts. During the course of search, statement of Shri Atul Kumar Bansal was recorded on 30.01.2004 on oath under Section 132 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment order for AY 1999-2000 is reproduced below for ready reference:- "9. I have considered the explanation rendered by assessee very carefully. It is noticed that the assessee has not produced any evidence, whatsoever, in support of the genuineness and extent of income declared in the return of income. The assessee has also not furnished any evidence in support of the extent of the commission reported at 0.20% (20 paise) per lakh or 0.10% (later informed) or Rs.60,000/- p.m. (as stated in another statement). The nature and extent of expenses incurred to earn such commission and its evidence has not been furnished. No doubt, it is true that the assessee has been getting commission on all the bogus billings, but the extent of commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of such commission income which is assessed on protective basis. The same is sustained by the CIT(A). Hence, these appeals by the assessee. 5. At the time of hearing before us, it is stated by the learned counsel that the income from commission on the accommodation bills issued by Shri Atul Kumar Bansal and Shri Deepak Khandelwal had already been assessed on substantive basis in their hands. That both Shri Bansal and Shri Khandelwal have not disputed that the income is assessable in their hands but have only disputed the quantum of the income determined. That in the first round of appeal, the matter reached to the ITAT and even before the ITAT, Shri Atul Kumar Bansal disputed the quantum of income determined in his hands and the I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the hands of Shri Atul Kumar Bansal/Shri Deepak Khandelwal has not yet become final. Therefore, he submitted that since the income has been assessed in the hands of the assessee, penalty has rightly been levied and the same should be sustained. 7. We have carefully considered the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. The facts of the case have already been narrated above in paragraph No.2 from which, it is an admitted position that Shri Atul Kumar Bansal and Shri Deepak Khandelwal were carrying on the business of issuing accommodation bills to various parties by using the name of various concerns. Shri Atul Kumar Bansal in his statement recorded during the course of search on various dates admitted this fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
