2013 (5) TMI 326 - HC - Income Tax

Tribunal's Decision Upheld: Assessing Officer's Sum Deemed Voluntarily Declared Income

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, ruling that the sum added by the Assessing Officer was included in the additional income voluntarily ... Search operation - Whether the Tribunal fell into error in directing that the sum of Rs. 39,52,293/-, added by the AO was covered by the disclosure made by the assessee after the survey conducted, which led to his filing a return? - Held that:- The question is one which entirely rests on facts and is not a substantial question of law. Secondly, even if we consider the question on merits the Tribunal has arrived at the correct decision in concluding that the said sum of Rs. 39,52,293/ which was added by the assessing officer was embedded in the additional offer of Rs.1,41,68,206 made by the assessee at the time of the survey proceedings - in favour of the respondent/assessee. Issues:- Interpretation of whether a sum added by the Assessing Officer was covered by the disclosure made by the assessee after a survey.- Determination of whether the sum added back by the Assessing Officer was embedded in the additional business income offered by the assessee.Analysis:1. The appeal pertains to a dispute regarding the addition of Rs. 39,52,293 by the Assessing Officer to the income of the assessee for the assessment year 2008-09. The main question for consideration was whether this sum was covered by the disclosure made by the assessee after a survey conducted. The respondent argued that the sum was already included in the additional business income offered by the assessee, totaling Rs. 1,41,68,206. The Tribunal examined the facts and concluded that the additional sum offered by the assessee exceeded the amount added by the Assessing Officer, indicating that the disputed amount was embedded in the total offer made by the assessee.2. The Tribunal found that the assessee, in an attempt to make a genuine disclosure, offered an additional sum to complete the total figure of Rs. 15 crores declared during the survey. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision that the disputed amount should be considered to be part of the additional income offered by the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the CIT (A)'s order, affirming that the sum added by the Assessing Officer was already covered within the total additional income voluntarily declared by the assessee.3. The High Court concurred with the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the question at hand was primarily factual and did not constitute a substantial question of law. Even on merits, the Court agreed that the sum added by the Assessing Officer was indeed embedded in the additional offer made by the assessee during the survey proceedings. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal in favor of the respondent/assessee, ruling that the disputed sum was adequately accounted for in the total additional income voluntarily disclosed by the assessee.4. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, affirming that the sum added by the Assessing Officer was encompassed within the additional income voluntarily declared by the assessee. The Court dismissed the appeal, stating that the question in dispute was factual and that the Tribunal's decision was correct in determining that the disputed amount was already covered within the total offer made by the assessee during the survey.