9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aily collection suffers from any perversity. The view of the Tribunal that the daily collection cannot be spread over all 365 days in an year, was also perfectly valid. When the Tribunal was further spreading such collection rate for a span of six years going backwards, and thus, applying the method of interpolation, adjustment for inflation had to be made and therefore, correctly applied by the Tribunal. Telescopic benefit of income earned in previous year to cash and jewellery found - HELD THAT:- Since the additions were made on estimation for the entire period, the Tribunal was of the opinion that further additions under different heads were not necessary. We do dot find any error in view of the Tribunal. No question of law, therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment years 2002-03 to 2008-09 were carried out against both the assessees. The Assessing Officer relied heavily on the statements of the employees recorded during search suggesting that the average revenue collection of the club was ₹ 2 Lacs per day. He noted that a sum of ₹ 2,80,000/- (rounded off) was seized at the time of search. On such combined information, he came to the conclusion that the average revenue generation of the club was ₹ 2 Lacs per day. He deducted 50% thereof towards expenses and held that the net income of the assessees' business was ₹ 1 Lac per day. He divided this income equally between the two assessees and spread the resultant figure for the entire span of these assessment years. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ross income of the assessee ignoring the statements given at the time of search u/s. 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act for short) by Caretaker of the club and other employees who were running the club and knowing actual income and which is valid piece of evidence? Peculiar to Income Tax Appeal No. 1760 of 2016, the Revenue has raised an additional question which reads as under:- (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in giving telescopic benefit of income earned in previous year to cash and jewellery found during search and disclosed by the assessee himself in return of income ignoring the fact that the assessee has not discharged his onus that income earned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
