TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (3) TMI 145
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at Rs. 25,260 from the business of pans should have been accepted. That without prejudice to the above, the estimate of income from pan business at Rs. 30,000 is arbitrary, excessive and high under the facts and circumstances of the case. That in view of the explanation submitted by the appellant that the amount of Rs. 35,000 had its source in the earnings from agriculture, there is absolutely no warrant in holding that income as from undisclosed source. The explanation of the appellant in this behalf should have been accepted. That without prejudice to the above, in case it is held that there is justification for not accepting the explanation of the appellant in regard to the amount of Rs. 35,000, the quantum of addition at Rs. 35,000 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....therefore, the correct status of the assessee was that of HUF. On this basis the AO completed the assessment of the assessee in the status of individual on protective basis with the observation that substantive assessments would be made in the status of HUF. The total income for the asst. yr. 1987-88 was assessed at Rs. 65,000 which included the business income estimated at Rs. 30,000 and income from undisclosed sources at Rs. 35,000. The explanation offered by the assessee was not accepted by the AO. In the first appeal the learned Dy CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. Hence the assessee is now before us. 4. The counsel for the assessee contended that the business of pan is exclusively owned and run by the assessee in his individual ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to death and that the assessee carried on the business after 4 to 5 months, are also not denied. From the above it is crystal clear that the assessee had started his own business by investing a sum of Rs. 20,000 as explained by him. This fact was also supported by the affidavits of mother and brother of the assessee. It is also pertinent to note that a statement was also recorded from the brother of the assessee in which he had stated that the income from pan business belongs to his brother, Shri Mukesh Kumar Chourasia in his individual capacity. Therefore, after considering all these facts and material placed on records, we are unable to accept the case of the Revenue that the pan business of the assessee belongs to HUF. The overwhelming ....