2023 (10) TMI 265 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal upholds tax assessment, dismisses appeal on unexplained cash ownership and investment.

Krish Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. CIT Central Circle Noida

Krish Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. CIT Central Circle Noida - TMI Issues:The judgment involves issues related to the arbitrary nature of the order, issuance of notices under various sections of the Income Tax Act, addition of unexplained investment, ownership of cash amount, and taxation of cash in the hands of another individual.Arbitrary Order Issue:The appeal was filed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2011-12, alleging that the order was arbitrary, against law, and facts on record. However, as the appellant did not appear for the proceedings, the Tribunal had to decide the appeal based on the material available on record.Issuance of Notices Issue:The appeal raised concerns about the issuance of notices under sections 153C, 142(1), and 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. The Departmental Representative argued that the cash involved in land purchases was unexplained investment, justifying the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A).Addition of Unexplained Investment Issue:The appellant contested the addition of Rs. 95,60,000 under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, claiming that the authorities did not consider the facts and explanations provided during the appellate proceedings. However, the Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer rightfully assumed jurisdiction based on seized documents and upheld the addition.Ownership of Cash Amount Issue:Regarding the ownership of the cash amount, the appellant argued that the cash surrendered by another individual should not be added to the company's income. However, the Tribunal noted that the cash component was evident from the seized documents and upheld the addition made by the authorities.Taxation of Cash in Another Individual's Hands Issue:The appellant contended that the alleged cash amount of Rs. 88,60,000 had already been taxed in the hands of another individual. The Tribunal found that the appellant failed to provide evidence supporting this claim, leading to the dismissal of this ground of appeal.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee based on the findings related to the issuance of notices, addition of unexplained investment, ownership of cash amount, and lack of evidence regarding the taxation of cash in another individual's hands.