9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 872X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is to again examine the Assessee’s books of account and seek further explanation during the course of assessment, which exercise was already undertaken by the AO when the assessments for AYs 1993-94 and 1994-95 were completed originally under Section 143(3) of the Act. In the absence of any incriminating material justifying the same, the Court finds that the impugned order of the ITAT having deleted these additions does not call for any interference. Addition as balance of capital - there is no reference by the AO in the impugned order to any incriminating material. The case of the Revenue is that the original return filed by the Assessee for AY 1986-87 was not accompanied by the balance sheet and therefore, there was no occasion for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... garwal, wife of the Assessee and 2,33,425 on account of unexplained jewellery. The impugned order of the ITAT in regard to the deletion of each of the above additions is a detailed one which analyses the evidence with sufficient clarity. - Decided in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in seized material 7,46,000/-" 5. Against the aforementioned assessment order, the Assessee went in appeal before the ITAT. By the impugned order, the ITAT has deleted the additions at (i) to (vi) and (viii) to (xi) above. So far as the addition at (vii) above is concerned, the ITAT remanded the matter to the AO for a fresh determination. The Court is informed, by the learned counsel appearing for the Assessee, that in the consequential proceeding before the AO, the explanation of the Assessee was accepted and addition at (vii) above was in fact deleted. 6. It may be noticed at this stage that apart from the above additions, the AO has made some other additions. However, since that was not the subject matter of the appeal by the Assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue is aggrieved by, the scope of the present appeal is confined to examining whether the said deletions were justified or not. 10. As regards the additions made by the AO in the sum of ₹ 26,50,000 relating to AYs 1993-94 and 1994-95 as unexplained capital, as already noted for both these AYs the Assessee's returns were picked up for scrutiny and assessment orders, after inquiry, were initially passed by the AO under Section 143 (3) of the Act. The AO's impugned order dated 15th November 1996 does not mention any incriminating material recovered during the search that would justify the above addition. What the AO has done is to again examine the Assessee's books of account and seek further explanation during the course of assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which has not been or would not been disclosed for the purpose of this Act." Further, under Section 158 BB (1) (c) amounts that have been recorded in the books of accounts or other documents on or before the date of search would go to reduce the 'undisclosed income'. Viewed in the above perspective, the amount of ₹ 1,40,731 having already been disclosed in the balance sheet of the Assessee for the AY in question, the deletion of the said addition by the ITAT cannot be faulted. 13. A major addition that has been deleted is to the extent of ₹ 2,80,84,450/- on account of 'unexplained cash credits' relating to various AYs and the corresponding interest on the said amount for the AYs 1994-95 and 1995-96 in the sum of ₹ 31,05,3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, justified. 15. The other addition is of ₹ 8,67,150/- on account of unexplained receipts relating to AY 1992-93, ₹ 4,67,000/- on account of 'low household expenses' for the block period, ₹ 1,63,490 on account of unexplained investment in a plot, ₹ 1,35,746 on account of deposit in the name of Ms. Archana Agarwal, wife of the Assessee and ₹ 2,33,425 on account of unexplained jewellery. The impugned order of the ITAT in regard to the deletion of each of the above additions is a detailed one which analyses the evidence with sufficient clarity. 16. The Court is not inclined to interfere with the said deletions as it cannot be said that the impugned order suffers from perversity. For the aforementioned rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
