TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal partially allows appeal, deletes specific additions, and orders relief for interest under section 215.</h1> <h3>M/s RAJ PAL SINGH RAM AUTAR. Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER.</h3> The appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal. The additions of Rs. 1,35,000, Rs. 14,645, Rs. 8,331, and Rs. 2,877 were deleted. Additionally, the ... - Issues Involved:1. Addition of Rs. 1,35,000 and Rs. 14,645 based on seized paper.2. Addition of Rs. 8,331 and application of s. 145.3. Addition of Rs. 2,877 under the head 'job work receipts'.4. Applicability of provisions of s. 215.Summary:1. Addition of Rs. 1,35,000 and Rs. 14,645 based on seized paper:The addition of Rs. 1,35,000 and Rs. 14,645 was made based on a seized paper found during a search at the assessee's premises. The assessee argued that the paper did not belong to them, was written in English (a language unknown to the partners and employees), and was not put to them during their statements or proceedings u/s 132(5). The Tribunal held that the presumption u/s 132(4A) is limited to search and seizure proceedings and does not apply to regular assessment proceedings u/s 69. The Tribunal found that the Department failed to prove the ownership of the seized paper and the alleged investment. The addition was thus deleted.2. Addition of Rs. 8,331 and application of s. 145:The assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 8,331 in the declared trading results was unjustified, as similar additions in previous years were deleted. The Tribunal noted that the declared gross profit rate was consistent with previous years and no incriminating documents were found during the search. The addition was therefore cancelled.3. Addition of Rs. 2,877 under the head 'job work receipts':The assessee argued that the declared job receipts were better compared to previous years, where similar additions were deleted. The Tribunal found that the facts were consistent with previous assessments and no distinguishing features were presented by the Department. The addition of Rs. 2,877 was thus deleted.4. Applicability of provisions of s. 215:The assessee sought consequential relief regarding the levy of interest u/s 215. The Tribunal directed the ITO to grant consequential relief.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal deleting the additions of Rs. 1,35,000, Rs. 14,645, Rs. 8,331, and Rs. 2,877, and directing the ITO to grant consequential relief regarding interest u/s 215.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
