RNB INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-32, NEW DELHI

The substantive grievance argued before us relates to the addition of Rs. 1,10,574/- made by the AO on account of foreign currency found during the Page 1 of 5

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation was carried out at the various premises of Bajaj Group and its associates including the assessee and its Directors.

During the course of search at premise No. 2-3, Shivaji Enclave, Opposite Mother Dairy, New Delhi, foreign currency of 12 different countries valued at Rs. 1,10,574/- was found. Since the assessee could not give any explanation. It was added to the income of the assessee which was confirmed by the CIT(A).

Before us, the Counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that the foreign currency was the remnants of the currency taken by the family members of the Group on their foreign travel. It is the say of the Counsel that it belongs to six members of Bajaj family. The Counsel further stated that identical query was raised during the assessment proceedings of Vikram Kumar Bajaj wherein the Vikram Kumar Bajaj has taken the onus to explain the source of foreign currency valuing at Rs. 1,10,574/- and the explanation offered by Vikram Bajaj was accepted by the AO. The Counsel concluded by saying that, since the currency was found from the possession of Vikram Bajaj, the addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee.

We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute that the foreign currencies were found from the possession of Vikram Bajaj, which is also not in dispute that in the proceedings of Vikram Bajaj, identical query was raised, wherein the explanation was furnished by the Vikram Bajaj and accepted by the AO. It is also true that small amount of foreign currency were found which appears to be remnants of foreign travel undertaken by the family members of the Group. In other words, the currencies are leftovers of the business trips. Even if we agree with these facts and explanations of remnants and leftovers, even then the onus is on the assessee to furnish evidences. The assessee has furnished before us, the evidence for the purchase of foreign currency from M/s Bakshi Forex & Air Services (P) Ltd. The invoices pertain to the years 2012, 2013 and 2014 which are mainly for the US Dollar and Euro whereas the Panchnama shows currencies as Yuan, Hongkong Dollar, Rupaiya, Turkish Lira, Pound, Dinar and Bahat.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.