9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 1067X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in Hundi Dalali at Neemuch. A survey was conducted under s. 133A at the business premises of the assessee on 18th Feb., 2003. The assessee filed a return of income showing an income of ₹ 11,81,200 on 25th Nov., 2003 and it was selected for scrutiny. At the time of survey, assessee surrendered additional income of ₹ 31,70,000 under the following four heads : (1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C was claimed. The AO found that the assessee had never done the garlic business in the earlier year. In the year previous to the assessment year, garlic business was shown only to reduce the income surrendered during the course of survey under s. 133A of the Act. The AO also found that garlic was purchased at higher rate than the market rate of this quality of garlic. Considering all these facts, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the time of argument, he gave up proposed question No. 2 and confined himself to proposed question No. 1 and submitted that all the transactions of sales and purchase of garlic were through banking channels with the registered dealers which were duly supported by vouchers, therefore, the genuineness of the transaction could not be doubted. It was submitted by Shri Goyal, learned counsel appearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utedly, the assessee was not in the garlic business and the proximity of purchases with the date of survey makes whole thing very suspicious as has been rightly observed by the Tribunal and in our considered opinion, no question of law much less substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. We find no merit and substance in the appeal. 8. In view of the foregoing, appeal fails and is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
