https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387636 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387636 Unaccounted investment - alleged seized document having few transactions on debit/left hand side and credit on right hand side - HELD THAT:- As far as the figures of Rs. 60,00,000/- and Rs. 2,60,000/- which is on the left hand/debit side we observe that the assessee entered into partnership in Regal Samarth Krishna Construction Company which was executing the project of construction of flats in the name of Chitrakoot . The assessee also entered into partnership with other concern Regal Samarth Krishna Builders on 20.10.11 which was running another project named Triveni Heights . In the firm Regal Samarth Construction Company the assessee has introduced capital of Rs. 30,00,000/- through cheque during financial year 2012-13 and similarly in Regal Samarth Construction Company also assessee being 30% partner has introduced capital by cheque/cash of Rs. 30,00,000/-. So there remains no dispute that the amount of Rs. 60,00,000/- which is appearing in the seized material, stands duly explained with the capital accounts of the partnership firms and supports the contention of Ld. Counsel for the assessee that Rs. 60,00,000/- is duly accounted for in the books of accounts. Remaining amount of Rs. 2,60,000/- have also been paid by cheque as appearing in the seized document, thus the figure of Rs. 2,60,000/- also stands duly explained by the assessee. Since the assessee is one of the working partner in Regal Samarth Construction Company and the alleged transaction have direct nexus with the assessee but during the course of proceedings before both the lower authorities and before us assessee failed to produce any material evidence in support of his claim that the alleged amount of Rs. 85,00,000/-is not having any ingredient of undisclosed/un recorded income. So we are of the view that Rs. 85,00,000/- is the amount to be received by the assessee and it can be purely unaccounted income or it can be an amount which comprises of income and capital introduced by the assessee. Since the revenue has not brought any other material evidence to prove that the alleged amount is purely an income the assessee certainly deserves benefit of doubt and further since below the alleged account itself the sum of Rs. 22,40,000/- is mentioned as an amount referred as balance to be for payment. This amount of Rs. 22,40,000/- is the difference between Rs. 85,00,000/- (i.e. amount to be taken less Rs. 62,60,000/- the amount invested by the assessee), therefore the addition for unaccounted investment in our view cannot be more than Rs. 22,40,000/-. We therefore are of the considered view that the alleged addition of unaccounted investment needs to be sustained only to the extent of Rs. 22,40,000/- and thus the finding of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the assessee gets relief of Rsd.65,20,000/-. Ground No.1 of the assessee is partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530