9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 2.00 crore and then allowing the benefit of telescoping to the extent of available undisclosed income already taxed. We hold that the addition on this count is warranted and also benefit of telescoping should be given. While giving the benefit of telescoping for the preceding year, we did not allow the benefit of ₹ 22,06,750/- because the same was unrecovered at the time of advancing loan of ₹ 2.00 crore which was subject matter of addition for the preceding year. In view of the fact that ₹ 22,06,750/- was suo moto offered by the assessee as his undisclosed income along with certain other income, the benefit of such a portion, which has not been allowed for the preceding year, is now available to be adjusted against the income for the current year. Thus, the extent of the benefit of telescoping for the year would be ₹ 22,06,750/- as against the addition of ₹ 1.08 crore. We, therefore, sustain the addition of ₹ 85,93,250/- (₹ 1.08 crore minus ₹ 22,06,750). Addition is of ₹ 10.00 lakh on account of cheques found as having been issued by Mr. Manohar B.Sadhwani and another addition is of ₹ 5.00 lakh on the ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the advancing of cash loans by the assessee outside his books of account. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a search and seizure action u/s.132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act ) was taken against Kalani group of cases on 02-02-2011. The assessee is member of the Kalani group. During the course of search, certain incriminating documents were found. Some of such documents, which formed the bedrock for the addition in the instant assessment, are certain loan receipts/cheques issued by certain parties found at the premises of the assessee. The Assessing Officer (AO) sought explanation of the assessee qua these loan receipts/cheques and made the addition on not being satisfied with the explanation so tendered. The action of the AO was echoed in the first appeal. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal seeking relief on this count. 4. We have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. We will take up the addition, made on the basis of loan receipts/cheques found during the course of search, in seriatim. 5. Certain cheques totaling ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bjection to the same. 7. It is seen that loan to M/s. Govind Ram Sons was given by Sh. Mohinder T Kalani and not the assessee. Further such cheques of ₹ 8.00 lakh were not in the name of the assessee. Possibly, such cheques may have relation only with loan transaction in the hands of Sh. Mohinder T Kalani, which issue has been restored by the Tribunal to the AO for fresh adjudication. In view of the foregoing discussion and agreeing with the common submission, we direct to delete the addition of ₹ 8.00 lakh in the hands of assessee and simultaneously hold that the same may be examined in the hands of Mr. Mohinder T. Kalani. 8. The second addition of ₹ 1.08 crore is on the basis of cheques found at the premises of the assessee having been issued by M/s. Karda Construction. Such cheques amounted to ₹ 1,53,50,000/-. On being called upon to explain and correlate such cheques with the loans given to M/s. Karda Constructions, the assessee gave cheque-wise explanation which has been recorded on pages 6 and 7 of the assessment order. The AO got convinced with the genuineness of the transactions in respect of cheques from Sl. Nos. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he income for the current year. Thus, the extent of the benefit of telescoping for the year would be ₹ 22,06,750/- as against the addition of ₹ 1.08 crore. We, therefore, sustain the addition of ₹ 85,93,250/- (₹ 1.08 crore minus ₹ 22,06,750). 12. The next addition is of ₹ 10.00 lakh on account of cheques found as having been issued by Mr. Manohar B.Sadhwani and another addition is of ₹ 5.00 lakh on the basis of cheques issued by Mr. Baldeva and found from the assessee s premises. The AO made addition totaling ₹ 15.00 lakh on the basis of such cheques found, which was countenanced in the first appeal. 13. The ld. AR fairly conceded before the Tribunal that he had no explanation in respect of these two amounts. We, therefore, sustain the additions of ₹ 10.00 lakh and ₹ 5.00 lakh. 14. Next is the addition on account of unrecorded loans given/cheques found to have been issued by Mr. Pradip D. Kalani amounting to ₹ 34,67,560/-. 15. Page no. 92 of the paper book is a copy of a document found at the time of search acknowledging receipt of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
