9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the time of the survey. This addition has been reduced by a sum of ₹ 3,24,000/- by correcting mistakes pointed out in the inventory, and has been sustained at ₹ 22,46,217/-. There are a raft of decision to the effect that solely on the basis of admission obtained in the statement recorded u/s 133A no addition can be made. - Decided in favour of assessee Disallowance of interest paid to the creditors - Held that:- In fact a sum of ₹ 2.5 lacs was paid to S.P. Jain Management Institute, Mumbai, for the admission of his son in MBA. Later this amount was referred to the assessee who debited the same in his books in the name of S.P. Jain Management Institute instead of debiting his capital account. So the authorities guesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of accounts of the assessee and, therefore, he rejected them. 2.2 During the course of survey, in his statement recorded on 24/01/2008, the assessee Shri Bhagwan Kuamr Tapariya, had admitted the following unaccounted income, while replying to Question No. 14 of his statement :- (i) Unaccounted investment in the Residential property ₹ 17,50,000/- (ii) Excess cash found ₹ 8,97,350/- (iii) Excess tock found ₹ 28,70,477/- Total ₹ 55,17,827/- He also paid advance tax of ₹ 16,50,000/-. However, in the computation of unaccounted income so admitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arding addition of ₹ 22,44,277/- (sustained by the ld. CIT(A)) it has been argued that as per settled principle of law no statement can be recorded u/s 133A and if such a statement is recorded no forced surrender can be obtained. Above all it was argued that only on the basis of such a statement, which does not have any evidentiary value, no addition can be made. The above submissions have been refuted by ld. D.R. tooth and nail. 2.6 After considering rival submissions we have found that this addition is based solely on the statement of the assessee recorded u/s 133A of the Act. There is a circular of CBDT No. 286/2/2003, and dated 11/03/2003, which restrain the survey team from taking forcible surrender. The mere fact that the sur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cost. d. The stock lying in adjutant premises belonging to the son of assessee namely Low I B [P.B. Page 45 S.No. 2]. The assessee never deals in such items. The assessee produced the purchase vouchers by son and shown that payment was made by assessee's son by a/c payee cheque. e. That weight of oil in tank was taken more than its capacity and lost sight to the fact of accumulated GAD which even reduces the quantity of oil in the tank. f. The assessee filed detailed working of stock but the same was rejected without pointing out any error simply on the presumption of afterthought. Further, the A.O. has also accepted the opening stock, purchases, sales and closing stock shown by the assessee. The books of the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , an addition of ₹ 30,000/- as notional interest was made. After hearing both sides in the light of the facts and evidence pertaining to this issue it is undisputedly found that there was a opening capital of ₹ 55,97,139/-and closing capital was of ₹ 75,52,870/- (APB 22) on which no interest has been claimed. In these circumstances, the charging of notional interest is not justified. The A.O. has not even been able to establish nexus between the two. Accordingly, we delete this addition of ₹ 30,000/- and allowed ground No. (2) of this appeal. 4 Ground No. (3) is regarding charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C. The charging of interest under the Act, is mandatory but the assessee is entitled to consequential rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
