9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1921X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he view that the tax authorities are not justified in interpreting the figures as in lakhs . When this point was put to Ld D.R, he also admitted that the possibility of taking the figures in thousands is more in the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence the aggregate amount for consideration should be taken as Rs.65,000/- and not Rs.65,00,000/- as presumed by tax authorities. Nature of payment - contention of the assessee is that he has not received any payment as alleged by the tax authorities - There is no evidence to show that there were certain business transactions which resulted in payment of any income by Shri Vinod Faria to the assessee. Hence, even if it is considered for a moment that the payments have been made to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Vinod Faria. Remaining grounds are general/consequential. 4. Facts relating to the addition of ₹ 65,00,000/- are stated in brief. The Revenue carried out search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act in the hands of the assessee as well as another person named Shri Vinod Faria. The assessee is one of the Directors of M/s. Grishma Construction Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., which is engaged in construction business. The assessee is also proprietor of M/s. S. Ramdas, which is engaged in the business of finance and financial consultancy. During the course of search and seizure operation conducted in the hands of Shri Vinod Faria, certain incriminating documents were seized. The noting made in loose papers No. 43 44 of Annexure A- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Faria, but those dealings did not fructify. Hence there is no scope to interpret that the assessee has received any fees from Shri Vinod Faria outside the books. He submitted that these documents are to be considered as dumb documents and hence no addition can be made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of these loose sheets. The Ld A.R also advanced an alternative contention. He further submitted that the page no.16 of Annexure 4 contains the dates against the entries made in the earlier part of the document, i.e., the dates noted therein are 31.08.2007, 13.08.2007 and 18.09.2007. He submitted that the AO has culled out Rs.55.00 lakhs out of this loose sheet. The Ld A.R submitted that, considering the dates mentioned above, the transacti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... levant here, since the addition has been made on the basis of entries found in page no.44 and page no.16. In page no.44, the date month have been noted, but the year has not been noted. The only entry relevant here is 10.00 milan bhai . In page no.16, three entries are available against the name Milan bhai , viz., 20, 30 and 5. Though no date has been mentioned against these three entries, the earlier portion of the page no.16 mentions the dates as 31.8.07, 13.8.07 and 18-9-07. 8. We have noticed earlier that the assessing officer has taken the figures noted in these loose sheets as representing lakhs . In this regard, it is relevant to extract the following question and answers from the statement recorded from Shri Vinod K Faria on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is my employee. He has written the transactions of these papers in respect of cash transactions done in my absence but the transactions belonged to me only. A careful perusal of the above said statement given by Shri Vinod Faria would reveal that Shri Vinod Faria has stated that the figures have been noted down by him in thousands, i.e., Rs.10,000/- is written as 10.00 . It is pertinent to note that the page no.44 has been written by Shri Vinod Faria. However page no.16 of Annexure 4 was written by the employee of Shri Vinod Faria. A careful perusal of the same would show that a sum of Rs.50.0 was withdrawn on 18.9.07 with the narration Drawings . The drawings could not be normally in lakhs, but only in thousands. Hence the statemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... page no.16 pertains to the period relevant to AY 2008-09 as per the dates noted against other transactions. Hence, on a conspectus of the matter, we are of the view that the transactions noted in these loose sheets cannot be considered as representing income of the assessee. In view of our finding given above, we do not find it necessary to go into the question of reliability of the loose sheets. 10. In view of the foregoing discussions, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to delete the addition of Rs.65.00 lakhs, referred above. 11. The only remaining ground relates to charging of interest u/s 234B of the Act. The charging of interest is consequential in nature and does not require any adjudica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
