| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3173 (Ctk-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 153C
Although commission income was shown in original return filed under section 139(1) but same was not declared in return filed under section 153C and since assessee could not explain differences noticed by AO in both the returns, AO was justified in making addition as commission income fell under the head 'Undisclosed income' discovered by AO during the course of assessment.
|
Searh and seizure - Assessment under section 153C - Commission income declared in return filed under section 139 but not in return filed pursuant to notice under section 153C -
During course of search in case of third party, purchase deeds belonging to assessee were found and seized. Accordingly, AO framed assessment under section 153C and made addition on merit also on account of commission and bogus sundry creditor. Assessee's case was that even though AO could not get any revenue implication from alleged seized documents and even seized documents did not relate to concerned assessment year, still AO proceeded to complete assessment under section 153C.Held: Completed assessments could be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under section 153C 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 assessment which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. As apparent, commission income was shown in original return filed under section 139(1) but same was not declared in return filed under section 153C and same fell under the head 'Undisclosed income' discovered by AO during the course of assessment and assessee also manipulated in creditor shown in original return by Rs. 4 lakhs. The income declared in original return could not be shown less than income disclosed in return filed pursuant to notice issued under section 153C. Income declared in original return can only be enhanced/reduced by way of revised return, which had not been done by assessee in the instant case. As assessee could not explain differences noticed by AO in both the returns, AO was justified in making addition.
Distinguished:CIT v. Sinhaad Technical Educational Society Supra (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 3941 (SC).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Against the assessee.
A.Y. : 2011-2012
IN THE ITAT, CUTTACK BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|