TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 280
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ores (Twenty Crore) as additional income for the F.Y. 2008-09 relevant to A.Y. 2009-10. The additional incomes declare of Rs.20 Crores is over and above the regular income of M/s. Gupta & Co. (P) Ltd. The additional Income declared above includes the following heads:- i. Amount receivable on a/c of sales made outside the books of accounts based on Annexure A-3 & A-5 as mentioned in reply to Q.No.14 & 15. Further I want to state that Annexure A-3 & A-5 represents the sale of 3 months only and in order to buy peace of mind I as director of M/s. Gupta & Co. (P) Ltd. and with the consent of other directors want to extra polate the sales amount receivable out of books for the current F.Y. i.e. 2008-09. The exact calculation on this a/c shall be submitted shortly. Further on behalf of the company it is clarified that the purchases pending to the said sales are also out of books. Further the sum has been received by making sales by the directors in the F.Y. 08-09 relevant to A.Y.09-10, the amount will be specified shortly and that may be treated as part of additional income declared of Rs.20 crores. Further the excess amount of physical stock over the closing stock as per the books ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1998 12.50 Total - 20.00 As per this affidavit, Rs.12.5 crores was stated to be belonging to Sugandh Sansar, which was a joint enterprise of these three assessees and was compendiously known as "Sugandh Sansar" as per agreement dated 09.01.2008. The return of income of "Sugandh Sansar" was filed for the Assessment Year 2009-10 on 30.10.2009 declaring income of Rs.11 crores under the head "Income from business and profession" after claiming operational expenses of Rs.1.5 crores from the surrendered amount of Rs.12.5 crores. The credit for taxes paid was claimed in the following manner :- 1) Cash seized during search, requested to be treated as advance tax paid Rs.1,46,46,900/- 2) Self assessment tax paid Rs.1,58,68,840/- 3) Self assessment tax of Rs.1,05,00,000/- (35 lac x 3) paid by all the three members of AOP equally Rs.1,05,00,000/- Rs.4,10,15,740/- This return was revised by claiming that income declared was under the head "Income from other sources" instead of "Income from business and profession". There was no change in the tax liability as income remains the same. The assessment was made in the hands of three Members of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 264 is a judicial one. The nature of the jurisdiction and the rights decided carry with them necessarily the duty to Act judicially in disposing of the revision. The revisional power has to be exercised on an objective consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case. The power is coupled with a duty to be exercised in the interest of doing real justice between the parties, particularly when under the Act the order passed u/s 263 is final. The assessee's claim has substantial merit. Assessment at Rs.22 crore made in the intimation u/s 143(1) requires to be set aside and the income has to be determined at "Nil". 7. It was specifically asked to the assessee as to what happened to the cash of Rs.1,46,46,900/- seized during search which was requested to be treated as advance tax and also to the sum of Rs.1,05,00,000/- (Rs.35 lac x 3) paid by all the 03 members of AOP equally as self assessment tax as the relief has been claimed only with respect to a sum of Rs.1,58,68,840/- paid by the AOP as self assessment tax. It has been explained by the assessee that the cash seized during search is already considered in the hands of persons from whom the same was seized. Similarly, a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty under the section. 4. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) XXXII has erred in ignoring the fact that the questioned addition to the assessee's income was already a disclosed income to which provisions of Section 271 AAA (1) has no applicability. 5. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) XXXII has erred in not considering the true facts 111 his order and denying the benefit of provisions of Section 271AAA (2) of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other." 3. While pleading on behalf of the assessee ld. AR submitted that as per the provisions of section 271AAA, the Assessing Officer can direct the assessee to pay by way of penalty, in addition to tax, if any, payable by him, a sum computed @ 10% of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year. This provision is not applicable where the assessee in the course of search, in a statement under sub-section (4) of section 132, admits the undisclosed income and specifies the manner in which such income has been derived, substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived and pays the tax, together w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng of statement under sub-section (4) of section 132, the assessee has not disclosed the name of Sugandh Sansar for which the disclosure was made. She also pleaded that Sugandh Sansar was not having any visible operation for earning such income. 5. We have heard both the sides on the issue. The search and seizure operation was carried out on the Group of Gupta & Company Pvt. Ltd. at the various residential and business premises on 10.02.2009. the statement was recorded u/s 132(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 of Shri Virendara Kumar Gupta, one of the Directors of Gupta & Company Pvt. Ltd. He has disclosed Rs.20 crores in the statement. Details of which have been given in answer to question no.18. The cheques were also issued by him for the tax liability which has also been recorded in answer to question no.19 of the statement. An affidavit was filed by one of the Group persons, Shri Sharad Jain, wherein the disclosure of Rs.20 crores was substantiated. Rs.7.5 crores was made towards the discrepancy in the inventory prepared on 10.02.2009 at the premises of Gupta & Company Pvt. Ltd. and Rs.12.50 crores was for a joint enterprise of Shri Virendara Kumar Gupta, Shri Sudhir Jain and S....