9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of search was as per Board circular and due to some inadvertent mistake by the counsel during assessment proceedings it was overstated, which was clarified to the CIT(A) but the same has not been considered properly by the CIT(A). c). That there is a documentary evidence of the valuation made by the departmental valuer, mentioning the quantity of jewellery found during the course of search, which have been ignored by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) and hence jewellery found being within the Board circular, no addition on account of excess jewellery was called for. 3. a) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 32,35,000/-, out of addition of Rs. 42,95,573/- and Rs. 17,82,250/- on account of alleged nondisclosure of work-in-progress in the 'Income tax return' and which is against the facts and circumstances of the case as per para 4.8 of the order. b). That both the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) have failed to appreciate that complete evidences of the amount utilized for work in progress alongwith sources have been given during the course of assessment proceedings and before the Ld. CIT(A) and which have been ignored, without assigning any valid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty arising from the same business which was on account of purchase of construction material. It was submitted that seized documents has been believe to be correct and the liability reflected in the statement of affairs corresponded with the such sized document and hence the same needs to be accepted and the addition so sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) be deleted. 3.2. Per contra, the Ld. CIT/DR taken us through the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and it was submitted that during the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee was asked to supply the copy of the bill and ledger account to show that the payment had been made in the subsequent financial year and also the source of the said payments. In reply, it was submitted that the payment are on account of bricks, cement, raita and bajri but it was not possible to give confirmation letter etc. As per the Ld. CIT(A) neither any bill has been filed nor the source of the payments has been explained to substantiate the claim that these were paid out of explained sources of the assessee during the next financial year and in view of the failure on the part of the assessee to substantiate its claim, it was submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has righ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In Ground No. 3 the assessee has challenged the sustenance of addition of Rs. 32,35,000/- on account of non disclosure of work-in-progress in the Income Tax Return. 4.1 In this regard the Ld. AR submitted that the addition had been made by the AO on account of the source of investment in the proprietorship concern of Rs. 9,35,000/- remaining unexplained and in addition to this, amount of Rs. 23,00,000/- from the total amount of unsecured loans of Rs. 29,00,000/- remains unexplained/ unaccounted and he accordingly, treated the source of capital contribution as unexplained/ unaccounted. 4.2. In this regard, it was submitted that Rs. 9,35,000/- is on account of the income earned by the assessee during the year and the same has been duly declared in his Return of Income. The gross receipts from the legal profession being Rs. 8,39,600/- as per page 2 of the Paper Book out of which Rs. 4,19,800/- has been shown as profit and the agriculture income being Rs. 4,40,000/-. It was submitted that where the return of the income as filed by the assessee has been duly accepted by the Ld. AO as well as Ld. CIT-(A), there arises no iota of doubt as to treating the source of Rs. 9,35,000/- as unex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee during the appellate proceedings could not filed any documentary evidence regarding Rs. 9.35 lacs claimed as cash deposited from professional receipt and agriculture income and in the absence of the same, the said source was not found genuine and the amount of Rs. 9.35 lacs remained unexplained. Regarding loan of Rs. 10 lacs from Raja Ingots, Prop. Shiv Kr. Bajaj, Rs. 10 lacs from Rakesh Sachdeva, Prop. Sunny Tex Fab, and Rs. 3 lacs from Puneet Pal Singh, it was submitted that the same are not appearing in the balance sheet of M/s M.P. Builders & Developers as on 31/03/2018. Hence, these amounts were rightly considered as unexplained, unaccounted investments in the hands of the assessee. It was accordingly submitted that the addition to the extent of Rs. 32,35,000/- was rightly sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) and same deserves to be confirmed. 4.6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on the record. It is noted that the AO has made the addition towards unexplained investment in two real estate projects to the tune of Rs 42.95 lacs and Rs 17.82 lacs respectively. On appeal, the ld CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5.1994. The total limit of jewellery when applied in the case of the assessee comes out to be 1400 grams as per page 20 of the order of CIT(A). 5.1 It was submitted that the total weight of Gold Jewellery as found during the search action was 1315 gms as mentioned in the report of the Department Valuation Officer, the same has been duly mentioned in the documentary evidence of the valuation as made by the department valuer as per the copy of the Panchnama at page no 18-20 of the order of CIT(A). The copy of the Panchnama along with the valuation report of the Department Valuer Officer is submitted at page no. 52-68 of assessee's paper book. However, the Counsel of the assessee during the assessment proceedings has erroneously overstated the same and the assessment was framed in accordance with the same. The detail of jewellery is tabulated as follow: S.No. Location Jewellery in Gold Weight Remarks 1. Residential Premises 182 Grams (Equated Rs. 5.5 Lacs/ Rs. 3020 per gram) [Relevant Page-67] Joint Family residing at the house: Including the Assessee's both parents, wife and 2 sons. 2. Locker No. 176 587 Grams [Relevant Page 56] Locker in the name of the assessee and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
