SHRI BANNA LAL JAT,BHILWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

PDF · subscribers
ITA 475/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 April 2019AY 2010-1150 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessment proceedings for the relevant years were not pending at the time of the search, additions under Section 153A could only be made if incriminating material was found. The Tribunal also found that certain additions were covered by the voluntary surrenders made by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed long-term capital gains on sale of shares as exempt. The AO treated this claim as bogus and made additions, especially in assessments framed under Section 153A after a search. The assessee had also surrendered certain amounts during assessment proceedings.

What were the issues?

Validity of additions made under Section 153A when regular assessments were not pending and the existence of incriminating material. Whether voluntary surrenders covered the disputed additions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(38),Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(12)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR

Before: SHRI RAMESH. C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 474 to 476/JP/2018

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 10/04/2019Pronounced: 24/04/2019

per these annexures. Hence the addition confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) is uncalled for and be deleted. The ld. AR further pointed out that assessee has separately offered a sum of Rs.1,35,00,000/- on the basis of annexure A-2. The peak of annexure A-2 was only Rs.90,35,400/-.

1.

However, the assessee offered Rs.1,35,00,000/- to cover the 48 to 476/JP/2018 Shri Banna Lal Jat vs. ACIT discrepancies in other annexures. The difference as per various papers of in this regard is only Rs.6,32,171/- which is covered by the extra income offered in respect of annexure A-2. Hence no separate addition in respect of these papers is called for. It is further submitted that assessee has offered an income of Rs.2,80,00,000/- as per Annexure A- 2 which includes Rs.93,00,000/- on account of miscellaneous surrender.

Therefore, no separate addition of Rs.7,14,920/-should be made as the same is covered by the disclosure already made by the assessee.

18.

On the other hand, the ld. DR has relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

19.

We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. The assessee in the statement recorded U/s 132(4) of the Act has made surrendered of Rs. 1,67,00,000/- on account of unaccounted expenditure of the assessee. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO noted that the actual account of expenditure recorded in the seized material is Rs. 1,73,72,171/- and there is excess expenditure of Rs. 6,32,171/- which was added to the income of the assessee. The ld.CIT(A) restricted the addition by apply the NP @ 13.28% which comes to Rs. 83,952/-.We find that this amount of Rs. 83,952/- is also covered by the miscellaneous 49 to 476/JP/2018 Shri Banna Lal Jat vs. ACIT surrendered of Rs. 93,00,000/- by the assessee on account of the surdry/irregularity in the accounts of the assessee. Accordingly without going into the other contention raised by the ld AR when this amount is also covered by the said miscellaneous surrendered the addition is not justified and the same is deleted.

In the result, theses appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/04/2019.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼ jes’k lh0 “kekZ ½ ¼fot; iky jko½ (Ramesh. C. Sharma) (Vijay Pal Rao) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 24/04/2019. *Santosh. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Banna Lal Jat, Bhilwara. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File {ITA No. 474 to 476/JP/2018} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 10(38)

All 3,113 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(38) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →