9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. A few facts may be noticed. The assessee's premises were raided on September 26, 1995. The assessee filed his return of income for the block period starting from the assessment year 1986-87 to the date of the raid. The Assessing Officer found that there was an undisclosed income of Rs.15,53,020. The assessee was held liable to pay Rs.9,31,812 by way ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urther submits that the Tribunal has wrongly upheld the addition of the price of 13 kgs. of silver. Lastly, it has been contended that the Tribunal has not correctly assessed the income from agriculture. After hearing learned counsel, we find that the entire evidence has been considered by the Tribunal. It has been found that the articles of jewellery as well as silver were found in the safe of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gms. of jewellery on her person. This statement was accepted. However, no explanation with regard to 20 gms. was given. Thus, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was upheld. As for silver, it is the admitted position that it was recovered from the appellant's custody. Resultantly, an addition on that account was made. Nothing has been pointed out to show that the findings as recorded by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had produced accounts and shown the cost of inputs and the amount of other expenses as also the total yield, it may have been possible to find out the exact income. However, since it is the assessee's own case that the account was not produced at the relevant time, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be said to be wrong so as to call for any interference in the second appeal. No oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
