2006 (6) TMI 160

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder. The AO found that the assessee declared her capital at Rs. 1,10,860 in the asst. yr. 1991-92, which included self capital of Rs. 86,860 and her son Mohit's capital who was a child and which was deposited in her account at Rs. 24,000. The asset side of the balance sheet for asst. yr. 1991-92 stood as under: M/s Ghalot Pan Bhandar      Rs.    7,532 M/s Ghalot Industries       Rs.   37,845 FDR                         Rs.   42,600 Cash in hand             &....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee as on 31st March, 1991 was at Rs. 1,10,860 comprising of the capital of herself at Rs. 86,860 and her son Mohit at Rs. 24,000. The AO has not disputed any of the three items listed in the balance sheet as on 31st March, 1991, namely, the balance of M/s Ghalot Pan Bhandar Rs. 7,532, M/s Ghalot Industries Rs. 37,845 and FDR at Rs. 42,600. He has not accepted the cash in hand shown at Rs. 22,883 simply on the presumption that no prudent person would retain cash for the intervening period before making purchase of FDR or investing with some other concern. The finding of the authorities below is in the realm of suspicion and conjectures totally ignoring the fact that the cash in hand shown by the assessee as at the close of the immediat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he sides and perused the relevant material on record. From the assessment order, it is obvious that the AO has not made a mention for the charging of interest. I am aware that different opinions have been expressed on this issue by the Hon'ble High Courts. Whereas the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Vinod Khurana vs. CIT (2001) 170 CTR (P&H) 383 : (2002) 253 ITR 578 (P&H) has decided tire issue in favour of the Revenue by holding that when the order of assessment and notice of demand were issued by the same officer and both the orders were passed on the same day charging of interest under s. 234B in the demand notice was valid even though the assessment order did not mention specific sections while issuing direction to ....