TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (7) TMI 317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of this search operation, various incriminating documents/articles were found and seized by the Department. The books of account as per Annex.-A and A-1 were share certificates and debentures were found and seized. These books, IVPs and KVPs, share certificates allegedly belonged to this assessee. A statement of Sh. M.L. Jain was recorded on 6th Nov., 1997, wherein he accepted that these documents actually belonged to him. Thus, block assessment was made by the AO wherein various additions were made. The CIT(A), however, deleted various additions. Hence, this appeal. 3. The first issue has been raised in relation to addition for short cash of Rs. 2,87,800. This issue has been dealt by learned AO on p. 8 in para 15. The AO made an addit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a sum of Rs. 50,000 as a loan without interest to his wife; out of amount of loan she purchased KVPs. The AO made this addition because he was of the opinion that the assessee had invested his own money in the name of his wife. The AO worked out interest @ 15 per cent on an amount of Rs. 62,250 for the period from 20th Jan., 1997 to 30th March, 1997, and made the impugned addition. The CIT(A) deleted this addition. 7. After hearing both the parties and circumspecting the available records, it is found that this amount in relation to which notional interest has been added by the AO had been duly disclosed by the assessee in his books of account. Obviously, this impugned amount cannot be a subject-matter of addition in block assessment ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1994-95 520 1995-96 4,790 1996-97 380 1997-98 2,500 --------- Total 2,50,000 --------------------------- 9. In his statement recorded on 6th Nov., 1997, Sh. M.L. Jain stated in reply to question No. 13 that the investment in these shares was made from his undisclosed money and, therefore, h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompanies, etc. The impugned deletion is in order and warrants no interference at our hands. Therefore, this ground of appeal also fails and hence dismissed. 13. The ground No. (iv) relates to an addition of Rs. 9,450 added on account of notional interest in asst. yr. 1998-99 of the block period, in relation to FDRs taken by Smt. Madhubala Jain, the wife of the assessee. The AO found that the assessee had given a sum of Rs. 90,000 to his wife who in turn, had purchased two FDRs worth Rs. 45,000 each. In the same manner, as was done by the AO in relation to investment in KVPs, which is discussed while dealing with ground No. (ii). Without going into much details, the facts being almost identical to that of ground No. (ii), we dismiss this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amily members submitted before the AO. The learned Departmental Representative has not disputed the above facts. The AO made these additions on the basis of statements recorded during search from the assessee and his wife. 17. We have carefully considered the rival submissions vis-a-vis the available evidence on record. Admittedly, the documents relating to these gifts were found during the course of search. These documents indicated that the assessee's wife had received these gifts. However, in her statement, she could not fully explain the impugned gifts and rather stated that she had received small amounts on various occasions. The gifts received by Smt. Madhubala Jain are also reflected in the respective balance sheets of the makers ....