9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 74X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the CIT(A).- Decided against revenue Addition on account of unrecorded transaction - addition under the head unaccounted cash - Held that:- It is undisputed facts that both the surrendered were made by the assessee during the course of survey but same had been retracted immediately by the assessee. The assessee disclosed an addition income on account of loose paper/diary found during the course of survey in return. There is no basis of the AO add further amount of ₹ 5.5 lac. Similarly the addition made under the head investment in House property is also based on surrendered admitted by the assessee. The AO had not made this addition on the basis of any incrementing documents of evidences. Thus we uphold the order of CIT(A) in al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 23,16,020/- the case was scrutinized u/s 143(3) of the IT Act. There was a survey at the business premises of the assessee on 10.12.2009. During the course of survey cash and books of account were verified by the Authorised Officers during the course of survey as per AO excess cash of ₹ 3,20,018/- was found and some loose papers diaries and slip paid were found in which the assessee had recorded unaccounted transactions. The AO further observed that the assessee has not disclosed excess cash found as income in the return. He gave the reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee also had replied which had been a reproduced by the AO on page 2 and 3 of the assessment order. The assessee submitted that surrendered on account o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... war and not from individual account out of above withdrawl an amount of ₹ 2,85,000/- were paid for the purpose of wood for residential house which is also has not been debited in the capital account of the assessee. Further he relied upon in case of Surjeet Singh Chhabra Vs. Union of India (SC) and in case of Rakesh Mahajan Vs. CIT Tax Appeal 642 of 2007 and held that disclosure made during the course of survey is binding of the assessee which is also unexplained. Therefore he made addition of ₹ 3,20,018/- in the income of assessee. 3. Being agreed by the order of AO the assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) who has deleted the addition by observing as under :- 6.3 I have perused the assessment order as well as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. We have heard the rival contention and perused the material available on record the assessee had made the surrendered during the course of survey but immediately he verified the books of account and retracted from the disclosure. The statement recorded during the course of survey is not binding on the assessee as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court as same is not been a taken on oath. Further whatever cash found during the course of survey has been reconciled by the assessee and excess cash of ₹ 5,018/- has been confirmed by the CIT(A). 6. Ground No.2 is against deleting the addition of ₹ 5.5 lac on account of unrecorded transaction and Ground No.3 is against restricting the addition from ₹ 25,27,000/- to 58,005/- du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e have heard the rival contention and perused the material available on record. It is undisputed facts that both the surrendered were made by the assessee during the course of survey but same had been retracted immediately by the assessee. The assessee disclosed an addition income on account of loose paper/diary found during the course of survey in return. There is no basis of the AO add further amount of ₹ 5.5 lac. Similarly the addition made under the head investment in House property is also based on surrendered admitted by the assessee. The AO had not made this addition on the basis of any incrementing documents of evidences. Thus we uphold the order of CIT(A). 9. In the result the revenue s appeal is dismissed. Order pronou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
