9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reditors failed to give their signatures on the confirmation letters. Addition on account of agricultural income - Held that:- As decided in DEVENDRA P. SHAH, VERSUS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (1) , PUNE AND VICE-VERSA [2018 (10) TMI 1625 - ITAT PUNE] as per CIT(A) Net agricultural income is assessed at 65% of the gross agricultural income Assessee-Net agricultural income is assessed at 88% of the gross agricultural income - decision of CIT(A) is appropriate and it does not call for any interference. Unexplained Jewellery - Held that:- The jewellery found during the course of search action was worth ₹ 2.88 crores out of the same assessee disclosed ₹ 2.20 crores as unaccounted income of the assessee leaving the balance of ₹ 68 lakhs. The amount added in the hands of Netra P. Shah (wife of assessee) now stands deleted by the Tribunal. The relevant extract of the order of the Tribunal is given above. Considering the commonality of the facts, we are of the opinion the said order of the Tribunal in the case of Netra P. Shah (supra) is applicable to the facts of the issue under consideration. Accordingly, the issue decided in favour of the present assessee too for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 220000 - 12075000 600000 35390000 1910000 16900000 2805000 25000000 11033383 Addition on account of agricultural income - - - - - - - 444475 287894 - Unexplained silver - - - - - - - - 220000 - Unexplained Jewellery - - - - - - - - 916863 - Unexplained investment in FDR - 149903 - - - - - - 15000 - 3. Other relevant facts of the case include that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntation furnished by the assessee was accepted by the CIT(A) to a large extent and the creditors were found genuine. AO is of the opinion that the bogus investors in Equity cannot be genuine loan creditors . CIT(A) relied heavily on the remand report furnished by the AO in this regard. However, CIT(A) rejected the AO s contention that all the transactions undertaken by the persons whose transaction that the share application money contributed to M/s. Bhagyalaxmi Dairy Pvt. Ltd., are bogus. CIT(A) is of the opinion that non-genuine transactions were already offered by the assessee through the ITSC and it has become final. Therefore, it is an admitted fact that there are common names in the loan creditors and the list of investments in shares of certain companies of the group. This is the admitted position as evident from the application filed before the ITSC. It is the claim of the assessee that the transactions entered into by such names of persons can be partly genuine when it comes to unsecured loans and partly bogus when it comes to investment in shares . This aspect was not properly examined by the CIT(A) applying the strict tests while adjudicating the issue and wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d it relevant to extract the contents of said para 5.4 of the order of the Tribunal (supra) which read as under :- 5.4 We find, the following are the ratios decided by the revenue authorities in their respective orders : AO Net agricultural income is assessed at 40% of the gross agricultural income CIT(A) Net agricultural income is assessed at 65% of the gross agricultural income Assessee-Net agricultural income is assessed at 88% of the gross agricultural income Considering the adhocism involved in this matter, we find the average of all the above comes very close to the decision of 65% as held by the CIT(A) in his order. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the decision of CIT(A) is appropriate and it does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the relevant grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 9. Considering the above, we are of the opinion the ground raised by the assessee on this issue is decided as above with identical finding. Unexplained Jewellery Assessee s appeal A.Y. 2011-12 10. On this issue, at the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 9,16,863/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... each male member of the family would not be seized during the course of search because of family traditions in India, jewellery to the said extents is held by them. Once jewellery to the said extent is assumed to be held by the individuals of family as per the family tradition, hence the sources of said jewellery is on account of various rituals of family tradition and the same stands explained in the hands of assessee. Once the jewellery is explained to that extent and the balance extra jewellery found from the possession has been offered as additional income by the assessee, then there is no merit in making any addition in the hands of assessee on account of gold jewellery. Accordingly, we hold so. We direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of ₹ 9,16,863/- on this count. 12. From the above, it is evident that the jewellery found during the course of search action was worth ₹ 2.88 crores out of the same assessee disclosed ₹ 2.20 crores as unaccounted income of the assessee leaving the balance of ₹ 68 lakhs. The amount added in the hands of Netra P. Shah (wife of assessee) now stands deleted by the Tribunal. The relevant extract of the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ders of the Revenue and the written submissions filed by the assessee before us. On going through the above facts, we find the source of income for making the FDs worth of ₹ 2,30,970/- is the core issue under litigation. It is the case of the assessee that the source for the same is the proceeds received by the assessee on maturity of the earlier FDs. There is need for furnishing the cash flow of the matured FDs which form part of the new FDs of ₹ 2,30,970/-. It is an admitted fact before us that the assessee offered only an amount of ₹ 79,771/- as additional income for taxation and not the entire addition of ₹ 2,30,970/-. However, Ld. AR firmly submitted that the entire FDs of ₹ 2,30,970/- is explainable if time is granted before the AO. In our view, this matter needs examination in the light of the details of the cash flow. In case of availability of sufficient cash balance is demonstrated by the assessee in the remand proceedings, the benefit of excess cash needs to be granted in favour of the assessee. Only exception to this principle is that the AO should examine the likely use of such excess cash for any other expenditure other than for making th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
