9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onging to HUF. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that a search and seizure action under section 132 of the I.T. Act was carried out on 15.02.2014 in the premises of assessee. Notice under section 153A of the Act was issued and in compliance to the same, the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 11,95,710/- for the A.Y. 2012-2013 and declared total income of Rs. 9,68,750/- for the A.Y. 2013- 2014. The A.O. completed the assessments under section 153A/143(3) and made addition of Rs. 36 lakhs in A.Y. 2012-2013 on account of undisclosed expenditure made by assessee for construction of residential property at Noida and in A.Y. 2013-2014, A.O. made addition of Rs. 37,50,000/- on account of the same which is reduced by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the show cause notice issued by the A.O. and seized documents are placed on record. He has pointed-out that in the seized paper it is mentioned "claimed but not paid". He has submitted that in the seized document nothing is clear whether assessee paid any amount to the Contractor ? He has further submitted that since no incriminating evidences were found during the course of search from the possession of assessee, therefore, no addition could be made against the assessee. He has relied upon the Judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del.) and in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.). 5. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand, relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the A.O. while making the assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment" 6.2. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its recent decision in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (supra) in paras 69 to 72 has held as under : "69. What weighed with the Court in the above decision was the "habitual concealing of income and indulging in clandestine operations" and that a person indulging in such activities "can hardly be accepted to maintain meticulous books or records for long ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
