9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... convenience. 2. ITA.No.1342/Hyd/2008 - A.Y. 2004-2005 : Brief facts of the case are that the appeal of the Revenue is against the deletion of Rs. 10 lakhs added by the Assessing Officer as unexplained investment. Search and seizure operation was conducted in the case of the assessee along with Sudhakar group on 16.6.2004. Accordingly, proceedings under section 153A were initiated. Documents were found during the search which reveal that assessee was invested a sum of Rs.10 lakhs in Gayatri Trading Company and the same was added as unexplained investment. 3. During the course of appeal, the assessee submitted written submissions as under : "Your appellant submits that during the course of hearing it was brought to the notice of the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat for the assessment year 2000- 2001, the Assessing Officer added an amount of Rs.23 lakhs as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee being unexplained investment in M/s. Gayatri Trading Company. The addition was confirmed by CIT(A) while order in appeal in ITA.0864/CC-I, HYD/CIT(A)-I/06-07 dated 27th February, 2008 as per the cash flow statement, the investment in Gayatri Trading Company was closed and money withdrawn in the period relating to assessment year 2000-2001. 4. The CIT(A) further held that the money withdrawn from the Gayatri Trading Company has become part of the cash flow statement. The CIT(A) held that this expenditure, source of deposit in M/s. Gayatri Trading Company for Rs.10 lakhs. The CIT(A) further explained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the CIT(A) that withdrawal from Gayatri Trading Company should be considered as available for making the deposit of Rs. 10 lakhs. Hence, the Order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 10 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Act is sustained and the Revenue's appeal is dismissed. 8. In the result, ITA.No.1342/Hyd/2008 of the Revenue is dismissed. 9. ITA.No.1343/Hyd/2008 (Individual) : This appeal is similar to that of appeal of the Revenue bearing ITA.No.1342/Hyd/2008 in the case of Shri Anantula Janardhan, HUF. The present appeal is against order under section 153A of the Act , 1961 wherein a sum of Rs.13,28,333/- being investment of the assessee in M/s. Sri Venkateswara Modern Dall Mill (SVMDM), Suryapet wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot disputed by the Assessing Officer, towards in the investment in SVDM amounting to Rs.13,28,333.34 and Gayatri Trading Company amounting to Rs. 10,00,000/- and the additions may be deleted accordingly." 10. The learned CIT(A) after considering the written submissions of the assessee held that there was investment by HUF of which the assessee is the KARTA of Rs.23 lakhs in Gayatri Trading Company. The investment in Gayatri Trading Company was closed and money was withdrawn in the year 2000-2001. The assessee has furnished cash flow statement taking this amount of withdrawal from Gayatri Trading Company which was sufficient explained source of deposit in SVMDM by the assessee. 11. The CIT(A) also observed that there was no evidence for ut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sen on account of search operation carried on 16.6.2004. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the assessee had offered income of Rs.11,05,000/- for the assessment year 2002-2003 and Rs.9,95,000/- for the assessment year 2003-2004 which are explained as investment made in the case of SVMDM. The Assessing Officer did not agree with the contention of the assessee and added a sum of Rs.6,24,479/- as unexplained income. 15. On appeal before the CIT(A), the assessee's A.R. submitted that a sum of Rs.11,05,000/- offered for the assessment years 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 on the basis of wrong calculation of peak cash credit for those years and therefore, this amount should not be considered as available for making ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... awal of the same. Further, the facts regarding addition of Rs.11 lakhs made for the earlier years and the fact that the assessee had shown as having withdrawn the amount, has not been disputed by the Revenue. The only question is, whether the addition made in the earlier years will be available for investment in the current year. The department has not produced any proof regarding utilisation of that amount for any other purpose. Hence, we agree with the conclusion of the CIT(A) that the amounts added for the earlier years and shown as having been withdrawn in the books should be considered as being available for investment in the current year. We, therefore, confirm the Order of the CIT(A) in deleting a sum of Rs.6,24,479/- adding it as un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
