9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of the court was delivered by 1 K.KULSHRESTHA, J :- This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been filed against the order dated July 5, 2002 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, in I.T (SS) A.No. 8/Ind./98 which has been admitted by this Court on the following substantial question of law: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in adding the salaried income to the undisclosed income specified by the assessee in the return for the block period even when the appellant had in the past disclosed regularly his salaried income and also deducted the tax at source as and when the income was found taxable?" 2. The assessee is an individual in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s stated that the income having been disclosed, it was not a case of concealment. The Assessing Authority by his order dated December 29,1997 did not accept the claim of the assessee and added the salary income to the undisclosed income specified by the assessee and charged tax on the entire income of Rs. 3,22,479 under Section 158 BB (1)(C) of the Act. An appeal was filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. It was reiterated before the Tribunal that the salary income stood already disclosed and, therefore, ought to have been deducted from the total and could not have been subjected to any tax. The Tribunal however, did not accept the contention and upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer. It is in this context that the present a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xable limits. Contention of the learned Sr. Counsel, therefore, is that such an income cannot be added to the income for charging tax. In this connection reference has been made to the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v Purshottamlal Tamrakar of this Court reported in [2004] (270) ITR 314 (MP). In the said decision this Court has observed, that once the books of account disclosed that the income of the assessee is below the taxable limit for some years and for certain period, it is taxable as per the books of account, the liability would be fixed accordingly. The relevant portion in the report reads as under (Page317): "It is pertinent to state here that the aforesaid provision came on the statute book of Finan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IV of the Act on the basis of the evidence found. Learned Sr. Counsel for the appellant has however, referred to the decision of the same High Court, of a Division Bench, in Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax v. A. R. Enterprises [2005] 274 ITR 110 In the said decision, their Lordships have ruled that if advance tax has been paid in the relevant assessment year during the block period, the income during the said period cannot be treated as undisclosed. We may also refer to a recent judgment of this Court in I.T.A No. 29/2002 Dr. Brijesh Lahoti v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2006] 282 ITR 349 in which this Court has observed in paragraph 9 and paragraph 10 as extracted hereinbelow (Page354) : "Mr. Chaphekar, learned senior couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent that once it is established that income tax was deducted, the income cannot be treated as income from undisclosed sources. 10. Reference at this stage may also be made to the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Ashok Taksali [2002] 257 ITR 352 Their Lordships have observed that once the salary income of the block year has been taxed and tax has been deducted at source, there is no question of holding the income of the assessee as the undisclosed income of the block year. 11. In view of the several clear enunciations we are clear in our mind that the salary income disclosed by the assessee on which tax at source was deducted could not have been treated as undisclosed income. We may also pronounce upon the fact in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
