9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee has already disclosed jewellery in the regular return of income, it cannot be considered for addition in assessment completed u/s.143(3) of the Act r.w.s.153A of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to pass fresh order in the light of the order of the Special bench in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd (2012 (7) TMI 222 - ITAT MUMBAI(SB) ). With these observations, all these appeals filed by the assessees are remitted to the Assessing Officer to make addition only on the basis of seized material found during course of search action in these cases. Decided partly in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. Penalty u/s.271(1) (c) - genuineness of the gift unproved - Held that:- In this assessment year, the assessee said to have received cash of I5,30,000/- as gift in the name of minor sons (i.e I2,65,000/- each from his sons Joseph Prince and Antony Prince). The assessee was not able to properly explain the source. The Assessing Officer stated that the gift has been received by the assessee from a person who is a close relative to him. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed a gift deed on the stamp paper of I20/- which was purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s per return : 1,01,972/- Add: Income from other sources as discussed : 4,79,301/- Gross total income : 5,81,273/- ITA No.2740/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2007-08 Gross total income as per return : 18,01,604/- Add: Unexplained cash deposit as discussed Above : 2,30,000/- Depreciation as discussed above : 1,87,068/- Short term capital gain (as discussed above) : 9,65,007/- Disallowance u/s.40A(3) : 24,588/- Gross Total Income : 32,08,267/- Less: Deduction u/c VIA as claimed : 1,00,000/- Total income : 31,08,267/- ITA No.2741/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2008-09 Gross total income as per return 41,88,425 Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA No.2746/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2006-07 Total income (as returned) 2,02,97,344 Add Income from undisclosed sources (as discussed) 46,000 Total Income 2,03,43,344 ITA No.2747/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2007-08 Total income (as returned) 5,49,10,923 Add Disallowance made in order u/s.143(3) 1,50,717 Add Income from undisclosed source (as discussed) 29,600 Total Income 5,50,91,240 ITA No.2748/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2008-09 Total income (as returned) 2,06,37,269 Add Income from undisclosed source (as discussed) 70,301 70,000 Total Income 2,07,77,570 ITA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so relied on the order of Special Bench in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. 4. On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative placed reliance on the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and submitted that there were excess cash and jewellery found and the addition was made on this count also in certain assessment years and re-assessment was framed on the basis of search action when it came to notice that certain credits and investments are not properly explained. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. There are certain additions made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of information which was available with the assessing authorities in the form of earlier returns of income and financial statement attached thereof. In our opinion, additions could be made in the case of completed assessments (assessment years which were not abated) only on the basis of incriminating material found during the course of search. Admittedly, the Assessing Officer did not found any incriminating material warranting addition. Being so, we are inclined to direct the Assessing Officer to make addition only on the basis of incriminating m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h any cogent evidence to prove the genuineness of the gifts. Therefore, the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Officer are based on facts and sound logic. During the appellate proceedings also the Authorised Representative failed to substantiate with any evidence with regard to the genuineness of the gifts. In view of the above, the action of the Assessing Officer is justified in levying the penalty of I1,61,733/- u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. As per the provisions of section 271(1) (c), if the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income Tax or Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), in the course of any proceedings under the Act, is satisfied that any person has either concealed the particulars of his income or (ii) furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, he may, in addition to the tax, if any payable, direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty a sum which shall not be less than, but which shall not exceed three times, the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment of particulars of his income or the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income. The Explanations of 271(1)(c) have been held to be an integral part of the above section. While co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
