|The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 4876 (Del-Trib)
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Where the assessee/or her husband had submitted various affidavits and thus affidavits and confirmations filed from various close relatives were nothing but mere self-serving documents just to accommodate the assessee to explain the source. It was also strange that not a single transaction was through banking channel and everyone had given cash only to the assessee either for her treatment or for safe custody which was unbelievable. In this view of the matter and in view of the detailed reasoning given by CIT(A) on this issue, there was, therefore, no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) sustaining the part addition.
Income from undisclosed sources - Addition under section 69 - Unexplained cash -
Assessee was an individual and derived income from profession as architect, income from house property and from other sources. A search was conducted by the CBI at the premises of the assessee's husband Tribhuvan Singh. During the said search, aggregate cash amounting to Rs. 1,60,000 was found, out of which an amount of Rs. 1,53,000 was seized. Assessee stated that she had received cash from mother-in-law, Son-in-law, daugher, father-in-law of daughter and brother-in-law and also cash was received on silver wedding anniversary, Son's engagement and marriage gift. The AO while framing the assessment had made an aggregate addition of Rs. 21,10,000 which represents the sum found at the time of search by the CBI on 10-7-2003 from the residential premises of the assessee's husband, his locker and the assessee's locker. Out of the aforesaid, addition was made. On appeal the CIT(A) had deleted the addition of Rs. 5,20,000 on the ground that the aforesaid sum was a sum found from the locker of the assessee's husband and at their residence and as such, no addition could be made in her hands. Held: The AO, in the instant case, completed the assessment determining the total income of the assessee at Rs. 22,12,070 as against the returned income at Rs. 1,02,070 wherein he made an addition of Rs. 21,10,000 being the cash found from the residence and locker of the assessee during the course of search conducted by the CBI on 10-7-2003. The assessee neither at the level of the AO nor before the CIT(A) was able to produce the so-called jewellers to whom the mother-in-law and mother of the assessee has sold jewellery. Further, there was some force in the argument of the DR that if some cash portions were real gift, at least some document like gift deed or gift letter or some scribbling to that effect would have been found in the house or in possession of the assessee or her husband. However, nothing of that sort was found. The so-called long list containing names of different persons who had given gifts at the time of engagement or marriage of the son or at the time of silver wedding anniversary cannot be believed in absence of any iota of evidence found at the time of search and, therefore, this Tribunal concur with the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue that this was nothing, but, an after-thought. The various affidavits and confirmations filed from various close relatives, were nothing but mere self-serving documents just to accommodate the assessee to explain the source. It was also strange that not a single transaction was through banking channel and everyone had given cash only to the assessee either for her treatment or for safe custody which was unbelievable. In this view of the matter and in view of the detailed reasoning given by the CIT(A) on this issue, there was, therefore, no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the part addition of Rs. 15,90,000. Thus, in sum and substance, the assessee gets relief of Rs. 5,20,000 and the balance amount of Rs. 15,90,000 sustained by the CIT(A) was confirmed.
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT