9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 778X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unds are raised on merit will be dealt separately in the independent appeals. I.T.A. No. 242/LKW/2012: 6. In this appeal, the grounds on merit relate to the addition of Rs. 1,89,250/- (out of credit balance of Rs. 2,54,250/- as stood disclosed in the balance sheet forming part of the return that was already on record) by treating the said sum to be cash credit simplicitor within the meaning of section 68 of the Act. 7. From the perusal of the orders of the lower authorities, we find that the Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs. 1,89,250/- having noted the credit entry of this amount in the books of account of the assessee. 8. Before the ld. CIT(A), it was contended that this amount reflects advances received from the customers in respect of supply made to them. It was further contended that the supplies were made in assessment year 2007-08, but no confirmation was filed before the lower authorities. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition, having observed that according to the assessee, she has received advance in assessment year 2004-05 and sales were effected in assessment year 2007-08 after three years and this explanation cannot be accepted. 9. Aggrieved, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en from M/s Sanatan Cold Storage. However, there are some other assets which include a Kirloskar Generator of 105VA capacity, four air conditioners, several ovens, bread cutters, weighing machines and other small items like computers and its accessories, etc. The claim of the assessee, that its sister concern, M/s Govind Menthol have been utilizing these machines for the bread factory, was not acceptable, as the nature of business of the two units was entirely different. He accordingly estimated the value of total assets at Rs. 10 lakhs and since no bills for purchase were produced, the Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs. 10 lakhs as total value of the asset as unexplained investment. 11. With regard to the surrender statement by Shri. Kailash Nath Singh Patel, the Assessing Officer has observed that in the statement he has made surrender under different heads and under this head no surrender was made. 12. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), but did not find favour with him. 13. Now the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and reiterated her contentions. 14. The ld. D.R. has placed reliance upon the order of the Assessing Officer. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he machines loan of Rs. 10,00,000/- was stated to be obtained from M/s. Sanatan Cold Storage. The Assessing Officer observed that besides the automatic bread manufacturing plant which is stated to be purchased from the loan from M/s. Sanatan Cold Storage, there were other assets including a 105 KVA capacity Kirloskar Generator, 4 air-conditioners, several Ovens, Bread Cutters, Weighing Machine and other small items like computers and accessories etc. The explanation regarding the old machinery of M/s. Govinda Menthol being utilized for the bread factory was not acceptable as the nature of business of the two units was entirely different. The appellant had not produced any bills for purchase of the assets, therefore, the investment was estimated at Rs. 10,00,000/- and no credit for the surrender of income made by Shri Kailash Nath Singh Patel was allowed as no such surrender was found to have been made by him and the business of M/s. Krishna Food Products had commenced in the year under consideration only. The provisions of section 292C are applicable to the facts of the case and are reproduced below:- 292C. (1) Where any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not found to be in possession or control of the assets of the appellant relating to the business of the appellant nor is it a case that the appellant was a benamidar of Shri Kailash Nath Singh Patel. In any case, the affidavit filed by Shri Kailash Nath Singh Patel was made after 3 months of the commencement of the search and cannot be said to be the statement made u/s 132(4). The relevance of the statement u/s 132(4) was with reference to Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c) which spared the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing to escape the rigours of section 271(1)(c) and it was not an amnesty sort of declaration. It provided relief from penalty if as per clause (2) of Explanation 5 to section 271(1)(c), the assessee makes a statement under subsection (4) of section 132 that any money, bullion, jewellery or valuable article or thing found in his possession or under his control has been acquired out of his income which has not been disclosed so far in his return of income to be furnished before the expiry of time specified in sub-section (1) of section 139 and also; specifies in the statement the manner in which such income has been derived and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be given. Accordingly, we find no merit in the assessee's contentions. We, therefore, confirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) in this regard. I.T.A. No. 244/LKW/2012: 17. In this appeal, the issue on merit is with regard to the addition of Rs. 1.50 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained investment in stock of goods found in the said premises, for which inventory was prepared and was valued at Rs. 2,98,657/-. Since the said business was done on small scale, according to the assessee, no regular books of account were maintained. During the course of search, statement on oath of Shri. Raj Narain Patel, husband of the assessee was recorded and he stated that the daily sales of M/s Krishna Food were approximately Rs. 9,000/- to Rs. 10,000/-. With regard to the stock found, no satisfactory explanation was furnished. The Assessing Officer, however, allowed a margin of 50% and made addition of Rs. 1.50 lakhs under section 69 of the Act. 18. Before the ld. CIT(A), it was contended that the entire stock was out of credit purchase and the Assessing Officer has made addition on estimate basis. But he could not file any evidence in support of this contention and accordingly the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
