9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1516X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .O. observed that during the course of search and seizure operation from the residence of the assessee s bedroom, cash of ₹ 1,18,250/- was found and out of this, ₹ 1,00,000/- was seized. The A.O. gave reasonable opportunity of being heard to explain the source of cash, which was replied by the assessee. The assessee claimed before the A.O. that this was the cash kept at residence as the assessee either a partner or Director or having other business activities. He also referred the statement recorded on 11.05.2006 during the course of search in Q. Nos. 11 19 and admitted that this cash belonged to their disclosed source of income. The ld. A.O. was not satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee because of the whole group has made disclosure of ₹ 92.26 lacs as unaccounted income which includes undisclosed cash of ₹ 12.5 lacs, which has been disclosed in case of M/s. Shri Hari Associates, where the assessee was partner. The A.O. held that this was concocted storey just to explain the unaccounted cash found during the course of search and seizure and no nexus between cash found at residence and the books of account was established by the assessee and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abhai and others for the plot of land at Naroda. The said deal was put across to the assessee during the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) on 10.04.2006. It was explained by him that he would go through the books of accounts and find out whether the transaction was reflected in the books of account or not. It was also contended that the payment of ₹ 5 lacs was made by cheque and the same was part of the above last installment. The said name i.e. Suresh Chotabhai was also mentioned in personal diary of the assessee, wherein figures 435 + 12 Title fee are written. Two entry records have been seized and inventorized at page nos. 39 and 41 of the Annexure A- 1, which are the true copies taken out from the Sub Registrar Office, Ahmadabad-6, Naroda, wherein the transfer of the above survey number 954 at Naroda had been detailed. The monies of ₹ 29 lacs were paid to the sellers on 04.04.2006 and the ownership rights were transferred on 07.04.2006. The ld. A.O. further held that this amply demonstrates that all the payments had been made by the assessee group to acquire the land. But this final installment does not give any picture to include cash and cheque payment. The A.O. gave ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the assessee had made payment in more installments by mentioning in seized materials last installment, does not give any right to A.O. to make addition. The assessee has disclosed ₹ 29 lacs in the year under consideration including the cheque payment of ₹ 5 lacs. He also filed the copy of Bana Chithi in Gujarati version at page nos. 26 to 54 and page nos. 55 to 83 of paper book in English version. Ld. Counsel has drawn our attention on page nos. 70 to 72 and argued that ₹ 5,08,796/- paid by the appellant and their family members through cheques in the month of March 2006 and whatever cash payment made to the seller, which was ₹ 29 lacs has been disclosed in the current income by the assessee. Thus, he prayed to confirm the order of the CIT(A). 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The nomenclature given in the seized material is not conclusive evidence. The assessee has explained the entries before the A.O. Thereafter, the onus has been shifted on the Revenue to prove otherwise by making necessary inquiry or bringing out any evidence on record to make the addition which has not been controverted by the A.O. before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 140 Ramsinh Pratapsinh Vaghela, Chandkheda. 12.03.2006 4,25,000 142 Bharatsinh Navalsinh Vaghela, Chandkheda. 12.03.2006 2,12,500 144 Kesarba Kanaii Vaghela, Chandkheda. 12.03.2006 8,50,000 146 Prakashsinh Navalsinh Vaghela, Chandkheda. 12.03.2006 2,12,500 148 Kanaksinh Navalsinh Vaghela, Chandkheda. 12.03.2006 2,12,500 150 Kanaksinh Pratapsinh Vaghela, Chandkheda. 13.03.2006 4,25,000 25,50,000 Further, the page no.5 to 35 of the Annexure A-I seized from the residence of assessee, contains the title clearance deed and the MOU wherein another party named Jayesh Babulal Patel has been mentioned. It may be mentioned here that the middle-man Dinesh Agrawal and Hareshbhai Vasani in their statements recorded on oat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the name of assessee and other person Shri Jayeshbhai Babubhai Patel. Further, it was held that in case of firm, assessee has disclosed ₹ 43 lacs as additional income, simultaneously, he had claimed deduction u/s. 80IB on same income and no tax had been paid for undisclosed income. Thus, he made addition of ₹ 30,50,000/- u/s. 69B of the IT Act as unaccounted income. 11. The assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) who had allowed the appeal by observing as under: 17. I have considered the assessment order and the above submissions. The Assessing Officer has made the addition for the reason that as per the loose paper found from the appellant, land was agreed to be purchased in the name of the appellant as per Bana Chitthi for which cash was paid. The agreement as per Bana Chitthi was subsequently cancelled and no further payment was made. This fact is not in dispute. The appellant had explained that the land was purchased for the business of the partnership firm as the business was being carried out for development of land in partnership firm. The Bana Chitthi was in the name of appellant as per their practice as he was a partner of the firm. The firm i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
