Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2004 (10) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Company, Subba Reddy (HUF) and Rajini Reddy, wife of Subba Reddy. 3.  There was a search in the premises of the assessee under Section132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on February 23, 1996.  In the course of the search the following documents were seized : (i) Statement  of  accounts  prepared  by  one  V.C. Gupta,  Executive   Director (Finance)  of  the  company,  relating  to  the  settlement of accounts to the outgoing Director Subba Reddy and his group; (ii)  Work Sheet prepared by Chartered Accountants Giri  and  Prabhakar,  which was taken  into  consideration  for  settling  the  accounts  of the outgoing Director Subba Reddy and his Group ; (iii) Paper showing negotiation with buyers for purchase of flats. 4.  Concededly, except the three documents referred to above, there was no other seizure of cash, bullion, jewellery or other articles or things of value during the time of search. 5.  Based on the above materials,  the  Assessing  Officer,  gave  due notice  to  the  ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp; Director  Subba Reddy  and his group as the settlement of shares to an outgoing Director could not be indefinitely postponed and had to be worked out  based  on  the  entire value  of  the project; and therefore, the said documents would not themselves be considered as a conclusive evidence that  the  assessee  had  received  the entire sale consideration from the purchasers. 9.   According to the assessee, the Assessing Officer ought to have taken all relevant factors into consideration, namely, the actual receipts of sale consideration from the purchasers by way of cheques or cash before the date of search as well as the amount received as income generated by such sale subsequent to the date of search, which were in fact shown in the returns duly filed by the assessee as well as the tax paid for the same for the subsequent period. 10.   The assessee referring  to  the  fact  that  except the three documents referred to above, there was no other seizure of  cash  or  bullion, jewellery  or  other  articles  or  things of value ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....; or  unaccounted  expenditure  has  been  found by the Department ? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have concluded  that  the  seized  material  was  merely  an estimate  of  the  profit  that  might be earned out of the project and in the absence of any specific material to show that the appellant  had  earned  more income  than accounted no undisclosed income can be seized in the hands of the appellant in respect of the said project? (v) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have clarified that the amount of Rs.385.00 lakhs constitute the total profit before tax out of the project during the block period and the profits already offered by the appellant should have been excluded ? (vi) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case  the Tribunal  ought  to  have taken into account the profit already offered by the appellant in the said project over various years?" 14. The substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue in T. C (A) No.10 of 2000....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ee forcefully contends that it is admitted that except the documents seized at the time of search, there was no seizure of cash, bullion, jewels or other things of value.    In  other  words, the only materials available for estimating the undisclosed income or the  documents  seized  at  the  time  of search  as  referred  to  above,  those  documents  were prepared only for the purpose of settling the accounts of the outgoing Director,  Subba  Reddy,  and his group.    In  normal  business  practice,  much  less  in  the real estate business, the over all value of  the  project  has  to  be  worked  out  while settling the accounts to the outgoing Director, irrespective of the receipt of the entire sale consideration from the purchasers on the date of retirement of the outgoing  Director. Therefore, these documents cannot themselves be a basis for estimating the undisclosed income. 18.  We have given careful consideration to the submissions made by either side. 19.  ....