1998 (7) TMI 694 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal rules on assessment procedures, emphasizes reliance on concrete evidence over conjectures

Jaya S. Shetty Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

The Tribunal ruled that the assessment was not time-barred as the search continued until a later date. It upheld that assessments under Chapter XIV-B must ... - Issues Involved:1. Time-barred assessment2. Legality of assessment procedure under Chapter XIV-B3. Additions based on evidence found during search4. Specific additions challenged by the assesseeSummary:1. Time-barred assessment:The first objection raised by the assessee was that the assessment was time-barred. According to section 158BE, the order should have been passed before the end of one year from the end of the month in which the last of the authorizations issued u/s 132(1) was 'executed.' The assessee argued that the assessment should have been completed by 31-10-1996, but it was completed on 31-12-1996, making it barred by limitation. The Tribunal, however, concluded that the search continued until 20-12-1995, and thus, the assessment completed on 31-12-1996 was within the permissible time limit.2. Legality of assessment procedure under Chapter XIV-B:The assessee argued that assessments for searches conducted between 30-6-1995 and 1-1-1997 had to be completed as per the procedure prescribed under Chapter XIV-B of the IT Act. The Tribunal agreed that income under Chapter XIV-B has to be computed u/s 158BB(1) based on 'evidence found as a result of search or requisition of books of accounts or documents and such other materials or information as are available with the Assessing Officer.'3. Additions based on evidence found during search:The Tribunal scrutinized various additions made by the Assessing Officer based on evidence found during the search. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessment under Chapter XIV-B should be based on evidence, documents, material, and information found during the search, and not on conjectures, surmises, or estimates.4. Specific additions challenged by the assessee:- Cash of Rs. 55,950 and silver articles valued at Rs. 66,625: The Tribunal deleted these additions considering the status and income of the assessee's family.- Blank hundi papers: The addition of Rs. 1 lakh was deleted as the hundis did not prove any actual transaction.- Piece of paper showing Rs. 3,18,305: The addition was deleted as the paper could not be linked to the assessee.- Addition of Rs. 2,96,655 based on a loose paper: Deleted for similar reasons as above.- Investment in diamond jewelry: The addition of Rs. 6,76,471 was deleted since no such jewelry was found during the search.- Horse-racing transactions: The addition of Rs. 22,52,219 was reduced to Rs. 22,522.19P.- Addition of Rs. 5 lakhs: Reduced to Rs. 1 lakh.- Investment in 'Santhana Towers': The addition was reduced to Rs. 60,000.- Crockery purchases: The addition of Rs. 3,72,600 was deleted.- Pocket diaries showing loans: The addition of Rs. 88,75,782 was reduced to Rs. 42,000.- Deposits in bank accounts: The addition of Rs. 37,45,852 was reduced to Rs. 1,45,000, with the issue of the remaining amount set aside for fresh consideration.- Tenancy rights: The additions of Rs. 12,00,000 and Rs. 20,00,000 were deleted as the tenancy rights were in the names of the assessee's major sons.- Household expenses: The addition was reduced by Rs. 3,20,000.- Investment in flat No. 201: The addition of Rs. 7 lakhs was deleted as there was no basis for it.Conclusion:The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the assessment under Chapter XIV-B should be based on concrete evidence found during the search and not on mere estimates or presumptions.