9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ced by Ld CIT(A), we notice that following two issues mainly arise for our consideration:- (a) Whether the money transactions carried out through the bank accounts opened in the name of various partnership firms constituted by the employees and relatives of the assessee, belong to the assessee or not? (b) If the answer to the above question is in affirmative, then whether the quantum of income determined by the assessing officer and confirmed by Ld CIT(A) is correct. However, in the written submissions, the Ld counsel for the assessee has submitted his contentions with regard to the validity of re-opening of assessments also. 3. The facts relating to the case are set out in brief. The assessee is running a lodging house in the name of "Everest Lodge" in Calicut. He filed his returns of income for the year under consideration declaring income from business. He also declared commission income received on sale of gold biscuits. The assessing officer re-opened the assessments of all the years under consideration by issuing notices u/s 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee filed letters requesting the assessing officer to treat the returns of income already filed by him ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 7-9, supra. Hence, two assessment orders came to be passed for assessment year 2003-04. 5. The assessing officer made enquiries with the partners of the above said firms and found that they are the employees/relatives of the assessee herein. Further enquiries revealed that:- (a) All the partnership firms have given their address as "1/1859, 'Nishanth', Beach Road, West Hill, Kozhikode - 673 005. It was found that the said building belonged to the assessee herein and he was residing there only earlier. (b) The telephone number of all the partnership firms was declared as "381491" in the bank records. The said telephone number was found to be installed in the above said premises. (c) All the firms have given the mobile number as "9847321007" and "9846126662". It was noticed that both the numbers were taken in the name of assessee's spouse named "Mrs. Umaiba". (d) All the partnership deeds were found to have been prepared by M/s Raghunath & Associates, the advocate of the assessee herein. (e) All the partners did not have capacity to carry out such kind of huge financial transactions, as they are small employees earning low wages. (f) The call details of the telephone numb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Koya, another employee of the assessee submitted that he deposit money in the bank account in Mumbai. He further submitted that the assessee herein used to give instructions over phone as to where to go to collect money and cheques and also the details of bank account wherein they should be deposited. 6. The assessing officer noticed that the business of all the partnership firms was stated as "Sea food exports" in the partnership deed. However, they did not carry out any activity relating to sea food export. The bank accounts were having only deposits and withdrawals of money. In view of the information listed in the preceding paragraph, the assessing officer came to the conclusion that (a) All the partnership firms are bogus firms floated by the assessee herein. (b) The assessee has used these bank accounts to carry out hawala transactions, viz., distributing money and deriving commission. 7. Since the assessee did not explain the sources of the funds deposited in the bank accounts, the assessing officer determined the peak credit amounts of each of the bank accounts in each year (except in asst. year 2004-05) under consideration and assessed the same as the income of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee and the Ld counsel for the assessee furnished his comments on the remand report by his letter dated 04.12.2012. The comments of the Ld Counsel are extracted by the Ld CIT(A) in pages 9 - 12 of his order. 12. Thereafter, the Ld CIT(A) again sought a report from the assessing officer on the comments submitted by Ld A.R and the Assessing officer submitted point-wise comments, vide his report dated 14.12.2012, which is extracted by Ld CIT(A) in pages 12 to 14 of his order. Upon consideration of all the reports referred above and the materials available on record, the Ld CIT(A) sustained the additions made by the assessing officer in all the years and accordingly dismissed all the appeals filed by the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed these appeals before us. 13. The Ld Counsel for the assessee has moved a petition before us, wherein it is submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has obtained comments from the assessing officer on 14.12.2012 and the same were not put to the assessee. It is further submitted that the assessee sought for copy of the said report from the assessing officer, but he has failed to submit the same. The counsel has submitted that the paper book submitted b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee in this regard and accordingly, we decline to give any direction to the assessing officer, as sought by the Ld counsel for the assessee. However, the assessee is free to approach the assessing officer to get copies of those documents in accordance with the law, if so desired. 16. With regard to the validity of re-opening of assessments, the Ld Counsel submitted that the reasons cited by the assessing officer do not justify issue of notices u/s 148 of the Act. In the written submissions, the assessee has extracted the reasons for re-opening, which reads as under:- Asst. year 2002-03 and 2003-04:- "Enquiries conducted by the Enforcement Directorate and the DDI (Inv), Thrissur had revealed that Rs.333.24 crores were transferred from the bank accounts operated by Shri C Surendra, V. Abdul Kareem and their associates from Mumbai to various accounts in Kerala and Coimbatore between November 1999 and Dec 2000. Further enquiries conducted revealed transfer and encashment of Rs.432.41 crores through Centurion Bank, Calicut & Guruvayoor, HDFC Bank, Calicut, Indian Overseas Bank, Calicut and Manjeri Cooperative Urban Bank between April 2000 to August 2002. Though the accounts in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tivities, there is reason to believe that the entire transactions in the firms were carried out by and on behalf of the assessee. The income from such huge transactions could not be so meager an amount as declared by the assessee". 17. It is contended by Ld Counsel for the assessee that the reasons stated by the assessing officer are not sufficient to justify the re-opening of impugned assessments, more particularly in view of the fact that there is no material to link the bank accounts with the assessee. The Ld Counsel has placed reliance on the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Income tax officer, I ward, Distt. VI, Calcutta and others Vs. Lakhmani Mewas Das (1976)(103 ITR 437). We notice that the assessing officer has formed the belief on the basis of investigations carried out by DDIT (Inv.). Further the partners of the partnership firm have confessed that they were acting on behalf of the assessee herein. It is seen that their statements were not believed by the assessing officer on the face of it. The assessing officer has examined the veracity of the statements by examining the wealth position of the partners, their relationship with the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment and further his power is co-terminus with that of the assessing officer. This statutory position is further made clear under Rule 46A of the Income tax Rules. Accordingly, in our view, the Ld CIT(A) has issued the said directions only to exercise his judicial power in a judicious manner and hence it cannot be found fault with. However, we have already noticed that the assessing officer has recorded his findings based upon his independent enquiry and the reports of the investigative agencies only vindicated the stand already taken by the assessing officer. Hence, in our view, the assessee cannot be said to be affected by the direction given by Ld CIT(A). In any case, it is seen that the Ld CIT(A) has provided necessary opportunity to the assessee to rebut the remand report given by the assessing officer. In view of the foregoing, we reject the contentions raised by the assessee that the order of Ld CIT(A) is vitiated. 19. The Ld Counsel has also found fault with Ld CIT(A) in placing reliance on the contentions raised in the appeals filed by the partnership firms. However, we notice that the counsel for the partnership firm has only reiterated the stand that was already taken b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is no evidence to connect the assessee herein with the bank accounts and further the surrounding circumstances stated by the tax authorities are not sufficient enough to implicate the assessee. The relevant portions from the written submissions given by Ld A.R are extracted below, for the sake of convenience. "8.4: POINT "D": WHETHER the finding of the Assessing Authority that the Nine Partnership firms and the bank accounts in the name of such Partnership firms belonged to and were run by the Appellant is based on proper materials? 8.4.1: The finding of the Assessing Authority that the various partnership firms and bank accounts in the names of such firms belonged to the appellant mainly based on the statements of Sri Bineesh Mathew, Sri K.T. Sheriff, Sri N.P. Saidu and K.P. Abdul Gafoor and on the statement that all the Partnership firms had shown as their address, the address of the residential house belonging to the Appellant and his wife Umaiba where they used to stay until 1994-95 and which has been proceeded against by the Central Government. It is also alleged that these persons have stated that they were employed by the Appellant and that they used to contact the mobi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 1/1859, Nishanth, Beach Road, West Hill, Calicut-5 - is the house of Abdul Majeed. To Question No. 7 where he was asked about the statement given by the Bank Manager that he had withdrawn from NRE Account of Sri Assrulla Khan K.P., s/o Abdul Majeed, an amount of Rs. 37.50 lakhs from fixed deposit receipt as loan and who the said Assarulla Khan is and what is the relationship with him, Bineesh Mathew has stated that he withdrew the said amount at the direction of Sri Abdul Majeed who is the father of Asarulla Khan, the account holder and that he used to withdraw money like that every now and then, at the instructions of Majeed, the Appellant. It may be noted that even during this answer, he had never indicated that the withdrawals from the various firms" accounts were made by him at the instance of the Appellant. However, quite strangely, to question No. 9 and 10, he gives answers connecting not only him but also Kasim and K.T. Sheriff to the appellant: Q.9 Can you explain the nature of YOUR job? A: As I said earlier, I am the driver of Sri K.P. Abdul Majeed. As per Abdul Majeed's instructions, myself KASIM, SHERIFF, have signed the Partnership Deeds relating to the above fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with penalty and prosecution. 8.4.7: Sri K.T.Sheriff was first examined on 19-08-2002 by the ADI, Calicut when he also indicated that he had signed papers at the instance of Sri Kasim and that he had signed the account opening forms at his house and that he did not sign the Partnership Deeds in the presence of Notary Public and that the papers were brought by Kasim only. He also explained that from his house, calls have been made to Umaiba who is Majeed's wife. He has not indicated that Sri Majeed was connected with the various firms in any manner. In cross examination on 30-06-2008, he stated that Mr Majeed was his relative and that I had worked with him for about six months during 1998 or 1999 and that his mother used to talk to Mr Majeed's people at home. He once again confirmed having signed papers at the instance of Kasim. Thus it may be seen that Sri Sheriff has not stated that Mr Majeed was running the firms and/or the bank accounts. 8.4.8: Sri Arun Kumar - the only Bank Manager who has been questioned - has only indicated that Mr Majeed had come to the Bank to open an NRE Account for his son Asarulla Khan and had once come to us in connection with a loan account in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IN HOLDING THAT THE FIRMS AND THE BANK ACCOUNTS INVOLVED WERE OPERATED BY THE APPELLANT. POINT"D" MAY BE FOUND ACCORDINGLY." 22. However, the Ld D.R strongly placed reliance on the findings given by Ld CIT(A), which are extracted below:- "10. On going through the assessment orders, remand reports and submissions of the counsel for the assessee, the following facts emerge:- (i) The principal place of business of all the firms was shown as Door No. 1/1959, Beach Road, West Hill, Calicut-673005. This is a house owned by Shri K.P. Abdul Majeed and his wife and at no point of time, the assessee denied this fact. Merely because the house is attached by some government agencies does not prevent the assessee from using/occupying this house and the only restriction for transfer of the property. The premises is in the custody of the assessee and has not acquired or taken over by any government agencies. (ii) The telephone number given in the bank account opening forms was 381491, which was the telephone installed at the aforementioned premises. Similarly the mobile numbers given in the bank account opening forms were 9847321007 and 9846126662m which were the mobile connections taken in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the bogus firm only because of the assistance given by the son of the assessee. As per answer to the last question, Shri Arun Kumar stated that - "Shri KP Abdul Majeed is not maintaining any accounts with our branch. He had come to me to open the NRE account in the name of his son Shri Asarulla Raka Khan KP. He had also visited us in connection with the loan account in the name of National Sea Foods." Why did assessee enquire about loan account of a firm, i.e., National Sea Foods, about which he has claimed total ignorance? The assessee has not been able to bring on record any material to contradict the statement of Shri Arunkumar. (vi) Almost all the partners in the firms and other persons involved in these transactions are either employees or close relatives of Shri KP Abdul Majeed. They had admitted in their statements that they have signed the deeds and bank account opening forms as per the instructions of Shri KP Abdul Majeed. They had also admitted that money was withdrawn from the accounts in the name of firms as per instructions of Shri KP Abdul Majeed. On 03-12-2012, during the course of appellate proceedings of the firms connected to this case, the counsel representing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cement Directorate concludes that the assessee was the mastermind behind the activities of the firm, the Income Tax Department should necessarily conclude the same. The picture that emerges through a superimposition of the Enforcement Directorate's complaint with the conclusions arrived at by the Assessing Officer is loud and clear that the kingpin and beneficiary of all these activities are none other than Shri KP Abdul Majeed. (viii) A statement on oath was recorded from Shri KP Abdul Majeed on 15- 11-2012. It was stated by Shri Abdul Majeed in response to question No. 10 that he has never met or known a person called Shri Bineesh Mathew, who was a partner in the four firms floated by Shri Abdul Majeed. However, in the affidavit dated 21-01-2008 filed by Shri Abdul Majeed, it was stated that - "I find from the statement given by Shri Bineesh Mathew that according to him, I had instructed him several times to withdraw money from firms in which he is a partner, in answer to question No. 7. He has also, in answer to question No 8, 9 & 10, indicated that I was instrumental in starting bank accounts in the names of the firms in which he, Sheriff and one Kasim were partners. In this r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (x) The fact that some employees in their later statements retracted from their original statement that they were being directed by the assessee cannot be taken cognizance of, because they did not explain that if they were not being directed by the assessee who was the person directing them in handling so much money, as they could not be doing so independently since they were men of small means. During remand proceedings, notice was sent to the partners of these firms but they chose not to appear either before the Assessing Officer or me. Instead most of the partners were represented by the same advocate during the appellate proceedings related to the firms. When the advocate was asked to produce these partners before me, the advocate said that they were untraceable and any retraction of their original statements should be ignored (This has been discussed in point No. (vi) above). (xi) The assessee in its letter dated 14-12-2012 has stated that even Enforcement Directorate has said that the money in the bank accounts though handled by the assessee was actually belonging to other persons. But since the identity, genuineness and real beneficiary of the amounts involved have not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax proceedings as the proceedings being quasi judicial proceedings as opposed to judicial proceedings, the A.O. no doubt is not fettered by technical rules of evidence, however like any other judicial proceedings even in the income tax proceedings the issues are decided on the basis of evidences. 8.8. The law of evidence governs the means and the manner in which a party may substantiate his own case or refute that of the opponents. Evaluation of evidence is the measurement or the determination of its probatic value. In judicial proceedings the accurate measurement of the evidential value of facts is a condition and an endeavour towards the goal of the discovery of truth. 8.9. Evidences in income tax proceedings like judicial proceedings include both oral and documentary evidences. Oral evidences, inter alia, include statements which are made before the income tax authority in relation to matter of inquiry and may include examination of the assessee himself. Documentary evidences include all documents produced before the income tax authority for his verification/inspection. Oral evidences may include admissions made by a party. Admission made by a party if used adversely against a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not ipso facto reject the evidence and it is now well settled that the portion of evidence being advantageous to both the parties may be taken advantage of, but the Court before whom such a reliance is placed shall have to be extremely cautious in such acceptance. It may be worth referring to the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of the State of UP vs Ramesh Prasad Mishra and another, AIR 1992 SC 2766 wherein it was laid down that it is equally settled law that the evidence of a hostile witness would not be totally rejected if spoken in favour of the prosecution or the accused but it can be subjected to scrutiny and that portion of evidence which is consistent with the case of the prosecution or the defence may be accepted. 25. The same question was dealt with in detail by the Delhi bench of the ITAT in the case of Hersh Winchadha Vs. DDIT (2011)(49 DTR 345, 135 TTJ (Delhi) 513, 43 SOT 544) and for the sake of convenience, we extract the relevant observations below:- "NATURE OF INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS AND POWERS OF AO 6.1 The dispute before us concerns the determination of the income tax liability of the assessee rather than fixing any criminal liability or accountability ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n information contained in some judgment or admissions before a Commission's proceedings, before they were declared ultra virus, were also to be treated as material available on record. (vi) In the case of Baghat Halwai, In re (1928) 3 ITC 48 (All) it has been held that AOs proceedings are, to some extent, in the nature of a private inquisition; they are confidential and they are not open to the public. To some extent, he is a party and a judge in his own cause. (vii) The Hon'ble Supreme court in Gadgil (SS) v Lal & Co. (1964) 53 ITR 231 (SC), held that the AO is, no doubt, an Authority appointed by the State to exercise statutory powers to ascertain the income of a subject and the tax payable by him to the State, but his position cannot be equated to that of a judge or a court deciding a "lis" between a citizen and the State. He is not bound to lead "evidence" on his own account with a view to rebutting the evidence of the assessee. (viii) In CIT v. Metal Products of India (1984) 150 ITR 714 (P&H), it was held that the AO may gather information in any manner he likes, behind the back of the assessee and utilize the same against the assessee, even if it does not, in all respects ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) 44 ITR 574 (All.) that proceedings for assessment are not proceedings relating to a civil rights. The liability to income-tax is not a civil right enforceable as such in courts of law. Such proceedings are of the nature of revenue proceedings. 6.3. Rules of evidence do not govern the income tax proceedings, as the proceedings under the Income-tax Act are not judicial proceedings in the sense in which the phrase `judicial proceedings" is ordinarily used. The Assessing Officer is not fettered or bound by technical rules about evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act, and he is entitled to act on material which may not be accepted as evidence in a court of law. 6.4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chuhannal v. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC), in this context held that - What is meant by saying that the Evidence Act does not apply to proceedings under the Income-tax Act is that the rigor of the rules of evidence contained in the Evidence Act are not applicable, but that does not mean that when the taxing authorities are desirous of invoking the principles of the Act in proceedings before them, they are prevented from doing so. All that is required is that if they want to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant's claim about the amount being her winning from races, was not genuine. It could not be said that the explanation offered by the appellant in respect of the said amounts had been rejected unreasonably and that the finding that the said amounts were income of the appellant from other sources was not based on evidence." CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE HOW TO BE USED 6.13. It would, at this stage, be relevant to consider the admissibility and use of circumstantial evidence in income tax proceedings. Circumstantial evidence is evidence of the circumstances, as opposed to direct evidence. It may consist of evidence afforded by the bearing on the fact to be proved, of other and subsidiary facts, which are relied on as inconsistent with any result other than the truth of the principal fact. It is evidence of various facts, other than the fact in issue which are so associated with the fact in issue, that taken together, they form a chain of circumstances leading to an inference or presumption of the existence of the principal fact. In the appreciation of circumstantial evidence, the relevant aspects, as laid down from time to time are -- (1) the circumstances alleged must be establi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and material did indeed come on record. In our view, in a sensitive matter like this, even a single clue or revelation can be of great importance. To reverse the order of the AO on this technical plea will amount to taking a lopsided view of the proceedings. Besides, the JPC has underlined the importance of Reports of investigation agencies like CBI, DRI, ED whose were in the offing, as the relevant investigations were in process. In view of these observations, we do not accede to the assessee's pleas in this behalf. The Assessee's contentions and objections in this behalf that the material available on record was not admissible as evidence and that it cannot be relied on by the AO, are devoid of any merit and are rejected outright." ................................ 6.43. We are conscious of the fact that the I.T. Deptt. was carrying out investigations in difficult circumstances ascribable to the sensitive nature of enquiries, their ramification on national politics and public perception. It was very difficult to get information and documents and to examine concerned links due to the premeditated surreptitious cover up of transactions and smokescreen corporate jugglery. There is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tiate the conclusions reached by the tax authorities. 27. Ld Counsel also contended that some of the partners have retracted the statements given by them, during the course of cross examination. It is a fact that the cross examination conducted by the advocate of the assessee herein took place after the expiry of about two years. It is also a fact that the partners of the firm are employees/relatives of the assessee herein. After lapse of considerable time and further in view of their relationship with the assessee, it is quiet natural to expect them to retract from the statement given by them on an earlier occasion. However, in the appellate proceedings of the partnership firms, the authorized representative of the partnership firms has again reiterated the statements of the partners that were originally given by them, i.e., the transactions in the bank accounts were carried out at the instance of the assessee herein. The said statement of the authorized representative of the partnership firms make it clear that they have again retracted from the retraction made during the course of cross examination and confirmed the original statement. There should not be any doubt that these p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the department show that the partnership firms do belong to the assessee and their bank accounts also belong to the assessee. Hence, in our view, it is his responsibility to explain the transactions carried out in those bank accounts. Accordingly, we answer the first question against the assessee. 30. The next issue relates to the determination of the amount to be assessed in the hands of the assessee, i.e., whether the quantum of income determined by the assessing officer and confirmed by Ld CIT(A) is correct. In this regard, the assessee has raised following questions:- (a) Whether the assessing officer was justified in invoking different sections, viz., sec. 68, 69 and 69A for making additions. (b) Whether the computation of "peak credit" made by the assessing officer is correct? (c) When the department has assessed only commission income in the hands of another accused person named Shri C. Surendran @ Surendra Mohan @ 1%, whether the assessing officer was justified in estimating the commission income at 2%. 31. We shall address these questions one by one. With regard to the first question, the Ld Counsel stated that the assessing officer has assessed peak credits of eac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e bank account. We get support for this view from the decision rendered by Delhi Special Bench of Tribunal (Larger bench consisting of 5 members) in the case of Manoj Aggarwal Vs. DCIT (113 ITD 377)(SB). The Head notes relating thereto are extracted below, for the sake of convenience. "Though s. 68 may not be strictly applicable since the assessee was not maintaining any books of account and the bank statement cannot be considered as the assessee's books of account, it is the onus of the assessee to explain the cash received by him and if there is no explanation or acceptable evidence to prove the nature and source of the receipt, the amount may be added as the assessee's income on general principles and it is not necessary to invoke s. 68, nor is it necessary for the IT authorities to point out the source of the monies received. Even if s. 68 is not applicable, the cash deposit in the bank can be asked to be explained by the assessee under s. 69 or s. 69B. No doubt the assessee had tried to file additional evidence before the CIT(A) in the form of confirmation letters and IT returns but these were not admitted by the CIT(A) and no reasons have been shown as to why they should hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferred the funds. However, the Ld A.R maintained his stand that the bank accounts do not belong to the assessee herein. 36. Under sec. 68/69/69A of the Act, the initial burden of proof to explain the cash credits/investments is placed upon the assessee. If an assessee fails to discharge the initial burden of proof, the legal fiction enshrined in those sections would come into play automatically. In the instant case, admittedly, the assessee did not discharge the initial burden of proof placed upon him, i.e., the assessee is not ready to disclose the name and identity of the persons who transferred funds to the bank accounts of the partnership firms. Hence, the revenue was constrained to invoke the legal fiction enshrined in the provisions of the Act, referred supra. 37. The Ld Counsel for the assessee argued that the funds were transferred from some bank accounts available in Mumbai. However, the statement given by a person named Mohammed Nazar before officials of Directorate of Enforcement shows that the assessee and his son have directed him to open certain bank accounts in Mumbai. This piece of fact further reinforces the case of the revenue that the funds belonging to the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in other years. When the assessing officer has proposed to assess the peak credit amount in assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2005-06, in our view, it would not be correct on his part to assess the entire amount of deposits as income of the assessee in assessment year 2004-05 alone. In our view, the assessing officer should have assessed the peak credit amount only in the assessment year 2004-05 also. 38. The next question relates to the computation of Commission income. In our view, it may not be correct on the part of the assessee to bank upon the assessment made in the hands of Shri Surendran for the reasons that (a) in the case of Shri Surendran, the AO has only estimated the commission income, meaning thereby, the rate of 1% adopted by the assessing officer in the above cited case is not based upon any material. Normally income is estimated depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. If an assessee considers that the estimate made by the assessing officer is on the higher side, it is his responsibility to challenge it with any credible evidences. In the instant case, admittedly, the assessee has failed to bring any material on record to challenge the estimate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
