Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (8) TMI 262

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e case, the ld CIT(A) has erred in:- (i) deleting the addition of Rs. 50,29,106/- on account of unexplained cash at Bank and cash in hand U/s 68 of the Act; (ii) deleting the addition of Rs. 72,000/- on account of undisclosed rental income." Ground of Assessee's C.O. No. 35/JP/2014 "1. That the ld CIT(A) while allowing GOA 3 of the appellant erred in ignoring appellants' submission that he has disclosed rental income what he actually received which has necessitated him more payment of tax on undisclosed income Rs. 8,71,000/- which could have been otherwise less by Rs. 21,600/- being 30% of Rs. 72,000/-." 2. The assessee filed his return for the A.Y. 2005-06 on 31/7/2005 declaring total income at Rs. 1,28,940/-. The assessee has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cer made addition of Rs. 17,79,612/-. The ld Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee had not shown rent from L-113, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi Flat at Rs. 1,32,000/- for which no rent agreement had been produced and rent was received in cash. In absence of any written rent agreement, the mere explanation of the assessee cannot be accepted. It has to be something more, accordingly, he proposed rental income at Rs. 17000/- per month. The assessee had also given the reply and claimed that the assessee would have got standard deduction @ 30%, if he would have shown higher rental income, which was in his own benefit. The assessee's argument was that the assessee was getting fixed rent for past many years. The ld Assessing Officer consid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing carried over from the cash book/bank account balances for the previous years. After considering the assessee's reply, the ld Assessing Officer held that the cash deposited in the bank accounts are undisclosed income of the assessee. The assessee claimed that the amounts deposited in the bank were out of house rent, bank interest and other related undisclosed sources not found acceptable to the ld Assessing Officer. There was no satisfactory explanation before the ld Assessing Officer of the assessee. In absence of any documentary evidence, he treated Rs. 50,29,106/- as undisclosed income of the assessee. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before the ld CIT(A), who had allowed the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(Raj). Accordingly, he allowed the appeal. Similarly, he also deleted the addition made under the head rental income by holding that if the rental income is increased then undisclosed income decreases by Rs. 72,000/- being telescopic impact thereby could have saved tax on Rs. 21,600/- being a standard deduction @ 30%. 4. Now the revenue is in appeal and the assessee is in C.O. before us. The revenue is against deleting the addition and the assessee in C.O. against the observation made by the ld CIT(A) on undisclosed income under the head rental income. The ld DR has vehemently supported the order of the ld Assessing Officer and further argued that the ld CIT(A) has allowed the appeal without providing any opportunity to the Assessing Offic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l. as on 01/4/04) Rs. 3317791/-   Rs. 7745872/-     He further submitted that the assessee had rental income of Rs. 62,000/- per month and no cash in hand had been shown in the opening balance. The assessee had shown income for A.Y. 2005-06 at Rs. 70,79,612/-. All bank entries are routed through cash book, which is cross verified by the ld Assessing Officer, if there was insufficient fund for bank deposit, it is taken as undisclosed income. Total of such income during the A.Y. 2004- 05 was Rs. 8,71,000/-. After claiming standard deduction, additional income of Rs. 15,44,610/- was disclosed by the assessee. The ld Assessing Officer had verified all entries of the bank accounts as well as cash book, which has not been dis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he ld Assessing Officer had made addition on the basis of closing balance, the assessee also not submitted the details of credit and debit entries of all the bank accounts for the year under consideration, therefore, the assessee was also not came with clean hands after evading tax from F.Y. 1997-98 by acquiring Kirti Nagar, New Delhi flat. Thereafter Bal Mandir house, Kota in A.Y. 2001-02. The assessee disclosed shortage of cash as income at Rs. 8,71,000/- but it is not clear where this amount has gone, which is statutory obligation on the part of the assessee to disclose the true and full particulars of income and investment made during the year under consideration. The assessee has not disclosed the name and address of the tenant who had....