9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve been sought to be raised by the Department, who are the appellants in this appeal. Question No. 1: During the course of the search, cash was detected amounting to Rs. 1,46,700 out of which, an amount of Rs. 1,10,000 was seized. That amount of Rs. 1,10,000 has been shown as undisclosed income for the assessment year 1997-98 in the block period. The assessee was asked to explain the source of the entire amount of Rs. 1,46,700. In his explanation, the assessee submitted that the cash belonged to a company by the name, Sait Purshottam and Co. It was also submitted that part of the cash was out of the savings and the salary income, which the assessee had received for last several years. At this stage, it may be mentioned that assessee, Nirm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . According to annexure A/2, the assessee has appended certain figures and remarks from which the Assessing Officer inferred receipt of Rs. 1,85,000 for the assessment year 1996-97 which he added back to the income for the year 1996-97. However, according to the Tribunal, the amount had accrued during Diwali. According to the Tribunal, the assessee was a Gujarati. That, generally during Diwali, the members of that community play cards. That, high stakes were involved in such games. The Tribunal also considered the notings on annexure A/2 which states "paid to Nirmal on September 18, 1995" and which also states "difference to be collected next year." The Tribunal further observed that in view of annexure A/2, the addition be limited to Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e quantity, the rate and the amount. The assessee was asked to explain the sources of investment in the above shares. In response, the assessee contended that his son was a share broker. That annexure A/1 was in the son's handwriting. That the chit belonged to the assessee's son. The assessee also relied on the word "Papa" on top of the chit to show that the chit belonged to the son, who was a share broker. The Assessing Officer disbelieved the assessee and added back Rs. 3,33,070 to the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1997-98. However, the Tribunal in appeal, came to the conclusion that the shares were not found in the possession of the assessee during the search. That, the assessee's son was a share broker. That there was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is of the material available on record. That, in the present case, an addition was made on the basis of conjecture. That, there was no proof of payment by the assessee in cash over and above the agreed price. Therefore, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 2,66,724. There was no enquiry made by the Assessing Officer as to what was the prevailing rate in the market during the relevant year. There is no basis for coming to the conclusion that the assessee had paid Rs. 2,66,724 in cash to the builder. There is no substantial question of law arising in this case on the above point. Conclusion For the above reasons, the appeal stands dismissed. No order as to costs. Before concluding, we would like to make a suggestion to the Chief Commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
