1993 (12) TMI 105 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal ruling: Revenue appeals dismissed, assessee appeal partly allowed. Income addition confirmed. Interest not interfered with.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. Versus ARODILAL AGRAWAL. KARODILAL AGARWAL. Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, partly allowed the assessee's appeal by confirming an addition as income from undisclosed sources, and ... - Issues involved:The judgment involves issues related to addition made by the Assessing Officer based on a search and seizure operation under section 132, summary appraisal under section 132(5), ownership of assets found during the search, unexplained investment in moneylending business, interest on additions, and deletion of additions by the CIT(A).Addition based on search and seizure operation:The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 6,38,398 for the assessment year 1986-87 based on a seized diary and statements. The CIT(A) found that the summary appraisal under section 132(5) was not conclusive for making the assessment. The CIT(A) highlighted discrepancies in the statements made by the assessee and held that the addition was not sustainable in law. The Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition.Ownership of assets found during search:Regarding the ownership of assets found during the search, the CIT(A) deleted additions made by the Assessing Officer after considering confirmatory letters and affidavit claiming ownership. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that there was evidence supporting the ownership claim and no basis for the additions, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.Unexplained investment in moneylending business:The CIT(A) deleted additions made for the assessment years 1984-85 and 1985-86 based on findings in 1986-87. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding no merit in the Revenue's appeals related to unexplained investments and interest on additions.Appeal of the assessee:The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal of the assessee, confirming an addition of Rs. 28,766 as income from undisclosed sources but remitting the issue of an addition of Rs. 22,000 as income from commission back to the Assessing Officer for fresh determination.Cross-objection of the assessee:The cross-objection of the assessee was partly allowed, with the Tribunal deciding on grounds similar to the appeal of the assessee. The Tribunal declined to interfere with the interest charged under section 215.Final decision:The Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the Revenue, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee, and partly allowed the cross-objection of the assessee, based on the findings and reasoning provided in the judgment.