TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 72
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest under Section 234B is leviable even if there was no liability to pay advance tax is fastened on assessee, since at the due dates of payment of advance tax, the assessee was incurring losses and could not have comprehended taxable income at a later date? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the levy of interest under Section 234B is consequential?." 2. The T.C.(A).Nos. 1151 and 1152 of 2006 were admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in upholding the addition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ners were searched on 21.4.1995. During the search, the department seized certain documents which disclosed unaccounted income in the form of receipt in addition to the accounted income with receipts, thereby resulting in the estimation of assessment on best judgment basis. On going through the averment and on the basis of the documents thus seized, on the assessment made thereon, the Assessing Officer levied interest under Section 234B of the Act. Aggrieved both on the quantum of assessment and on the levy of interest, the assessee went on appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In considering the claim of the assessee, the Appellate Authority pointed out that the method of accounting followed by of the assessee based on th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nection, learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the decision reported in 217 ITR 72 - RANCHI CLUB LTD v. C.I.T. which was confirmed by the Apex Court in 247 ITR 209 - C.I.T. v. RANCHI CLUB LIMITED. We do not find the decision relied on by the assessee would be of any assistance, since on a reading of the said decision, it is clear that what was decided therein was with reference to Section 234A, even though there is reference about 234B, the entire reading of the judgment shows that it was concerned about the levy of interest under Section 234A. 7. As far as the present case is concerned, as already pointed out when the quantum assessment itself was remanded particularly with reference to the expenditure vis-a-vis unaccounted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s in cheque and a further sum of Rs.1.82 crores as cash payment. Pointing out to the identical workings in both the slips marked 10 in the seized bunch relating to the transactions of J.B.Exports, the Officer came to the conclusion that the unaccounted portion of the transaction was to the tune of Rs.86.50 lakhs and hence, the stand of the assessee that the income to be estimated could be to the tune of money actually seized viz. to the extent of Rs.25.86 could not be accepted. Aggrieved by the addition of Rs.86.50 lakhs, the assessee went on appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) pointed out to the slips relating to G6 and G7 and held that unaccounted portion, could be Rs.42.86 lakh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....however observed that the fact that cash of Rs.25.86 lakhs alone was seized, was not a ground to accept that money transactions was only to the tune of Rs.25.86 lakhs. It held that since the seized material clearly pointed out that the cash transactions was to the tune of Rs.86.50 lakhs, the claim of the assessee could not be accepted. 11. As far as the assessee's appeal in respect of Rs.1,17,350/- was concerned, it reaffirmed the view of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Officer. Aggrieved by this, present appeals by assessee. 12. As far as the portion of the order of the Tribunal restoring the assessment of income to the tune of Rs.86.50 lakhs is concerned, learned counsel for the assessee pointed out that the Comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the assessee. The only challenge made by the assessee herein as to the order of the Tribunal confirming the order of the Assessing Officer is that the unaccounted portion could not be held to be an extent of Rs.86 lakhs. We do not find that there is justifiable ground to accept this plea. The assessee does not dispute the fact as regards notings in the slips, which pointed out to the cheque payment to the tune of Rs.86.50 lakhs, accounted for sale consideration and on an identical sum of Rs.86.50 lakhs being noted as cash transaction. The consistent case of the assessee is that the cash payment seized at the time of search was to the extent of Rs.25.86 lakhs and that even going by the notings in the slips in respect of G6 and G7, the a....