9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1862X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any evidences supporting the claim. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the fact that assessee has prepared capital account and balance sheet for the first time during the assessment proceedings in order to make the Assessing Officer accept the opening balance of Rs. 26,15,109/- on 01.04.2002." 2. Briefly sated facts are that as part of search and seizure operations conducted under section 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 in the group cases of AMR Constructions on 16.12.2008., assessee was also covered. Consequently, assessments were completed under section 143(3) read with section 153A of the Act. In the impugned A.Y. the total income was determined at Rs. 18,31,969/- by makin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the money was available with the assessee in real terms and the sources for such investment could be accepted to be explained, at best. However, with regard to sources for the Advances given of Rs. 8,00,000/ - and Cash on Hand of Rs. 9,50,369/- shown by the assessee on the assets side of the Balance sheet, it is clearly evident that the alleged explanation of the assessee that it was from out of accumulation to Opening Capital as on 01-04-2002 is without any basis and not properly explained with supporting evidence. Only after search operation in the assessee's case, in order to make the Assessing Officer believe that matching sources for Cash on Hand was available by way of Opening Capital, the assessee has for the first time prepar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear does not become an investment generated during the relevant assessment year, i.e., AY 2003-04 in the instant case. 5.3 In the case of CIT v. Ashok Timber Industries reported in 125 ITR 336 (Cal), the Calcutta High Court held that where an amount is credited in assessee's account on very first day of accounting year and explanation offered by assessee is not accepted, such amount may be assessed as income of assessee for that very year and not in the next year. This stand is further fortified by the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT V Parameshwar Bohra (2007) 208 CTR (Raj) 218. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer do not have legs to stand and the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents placed on record. Even though assessee was regularly assessed and was showing income from sheet metal crafts on estimate basis in earlier years, there was no balance sheet or any reference to the various assets and liabilities in any of the enclosed documents filed with the returns earlier. In the absence of such evidence, A.O. was in a way justified in disbelieving the cash balance which is almost ten times the income. Even for the advances also, there were no details and no explanation about nature and source. Therefore, A.O. could have been justified in considering only these two amounts for addition in the year. However, the A.O. did not take into consideration that these advances and cash balance shown to have been available ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
