2014 (1) TMI 1411

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,742/- for Assessment Year 2007-08, when the very basis of applying the peak formula was not present in the case? 2) Whether on the facts in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in accepting the incorrectly adopted theory of peak credit by the assessee when, the assessee has simply worked out the peak disregarding the nature of the credits and debits in different names? 2. Briefly stating the facts of the case reads as under:- 1. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of trading of auto parts. A Search and Seizure operation under section 132 was carried out by the Department in the business premises of the assessee on 27.02.2007. Thereafter, assessment proceedings....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mmissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), the learned Tribunal after having taken note of the submission from both sides, made the following observation:- 10. It is pertinent to mention that the assessee had made surrender of Rs.40 lakhs during the course of search itself. However, at the time of making the surrender, the seized papers BS-4 could not be examined, hence the amount of Rs.40 lakhs was offered on the safer side. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee has filed detained working in respect of calculation of peak amounts. When the Assessing Officer questioned method of working the peak amount, the assessee explained that whatever was found unexplainable or unrecorded was arranged date-wise/amount wise beginning from....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nvestment. There was continuous rotation of the amount. The assessee has also reduced the peak of earlier years from the peak of subsequent years. As per the peak statement, we found that total receipts of Rs.63,08,793/- was added to the income by the Assessing Officer without taking into account rotation of the fund in the very same account. The payment was to the tune of Rs.49,18,477/- giving the difference of Rs.13,90,316/-. However, as against this, the asessee surrendered Rs.16,93,308/- for the assessment year 2006-07 and Rs.61,742/- for the assessment year 2007-08 by date wise arranging the debit and credit. There is no dispute to the proposition that statement under section 132(4) has a greater evidentiary value till it is proved to ....