TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (6) TMI 1068
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no material found during the course of search operation. The CIT(A) made another addition of Rs. 5 lakhs in the course of appellate proceedings. According to the ld. Counsel, even for making this addition of Rs. 5 lakhs, no material was available on record. According to the ld. Counsel, during the course of search operation, no material was found against the assessee. In the absence of any material, according to the ld. Counsel, the CIT(A) ought not to have sustained the addition of Rs. 5 lakhs. 3. Referring to the next ground of appeal, the ld. Counsel submitted that the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 83,700/- towards improvement of the property at 4656, East Sixth Street, Pudukkottai, on the basis of the valuation report. According to the ld. Counsel, even for improvement of the property, no material was available on record to suggest that the assessee has incurred any expenditure. According to the ld. Counsel, seized material alone can be a basis for making addition. The valuation report cannot be considered to be a seized material during the course of search operation. 4. On the contrary, Shri Pathlaveth Peerya, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rds cost of construction. The CIT(A) after taking into consideration the stamp duty, registration fee etc paid by the assessee and the extent of construction made by the assessee, estimated the unexplained investment at Rs. 4,85,236/-. However, he rounded off the same to Rs. 5 lakhs for making the addition. The fact remains that there was no material found during the course of search operation. Even though the Assessing Officer claims that a statement was recorded from the assessee u/s 132(4) of the Act on 29.12.199 during the course of search operation, the Revenue could not file copy of the said statement recorded from the assessee. In fact, the ld. DR produced a copy of the statement recorded from the assessee on 3.1.2000. The preamble portion of the statement shows as if the statement was recorded during the course of search u/s 132 of the Act. It is not known whether the search initiated on 29.12.1999 continued till 31.2.2000. There is no reference in the assessment order about continuation of the search till 31.1.2000. The copy of Panchnama recorded during the course of search operation is also not filed before this Tribunal by either party. The Annexure 1 of the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d income for the block period. The Assessing Officer shall compute the undisclosed income for the block period in accordance with the provisions of the Act on the basis of the evidence found as a result of search or other documents, materials or information as are available with the Assessing Officer and relatable to such evidence found during the course of search operation. In the case before us, no such material is available on record as explained by the Assessing Officer himself in Annexure 1 to the assessment order other than stock of gold jewellery and silver. The statement said to be recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act from the assessee on 3.1.2000 does not throw any light with regard to payment of on-money for the purchase of property. Only Shri G. Babu admits during the course of his examination u/s 131 of the Act that he received Rs. 31 lakhs towards sale consideration. This information furnished by Shri G. Babu does not relate to any material or evidence found during the course of search operation. The evidence of Shri G. Babu could be relied upon provided the Assessing Officer is in possession of any evidence which was found during the course of search operation. In the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arlier part of this order, this Tribunal found that there was no material found during the course of search operation. The so called statement said to be recorded from the assessee u/s 132(4) of the Act does not disclose anything about payment of on-money. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. 13. We have gone through the decision of Ahmedabad Bench of this Tribunal in Kantilal C Shah vs ACIT [2011] 133 ITD 57 relied upon by the ld. DR. In the case before the Ahmedabad Bench of this Tribunal, a search was carried out in the premises of the assessee and during the course of search operation, cash jewellery, books of account and certain documents were found and seized. On the very same date, the assessee was examined u/s 132(4) of the Act and the assessee admitted undisclosed income to the extent of Rs. 6.20 lakhs. The Tribunal found that addition can be made on the basis of statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act. In the case before us the assessee was examined only on 3.1.2000 and there was no reference about the payment of on-money with regard to purchase of property. The assessee's son Shri S. Natarajan was exami....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... found except certain gold jewellery and silver. Statement was not recorded from the assessee. The statement was recorded from the assessee's son u/s 132(4) of the Act. The vendor of the property was examined u/s 131 of the Act and not u/s 132(4) of the Act. In those circumstances, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal also may not be of any assistance to the Revenue. 15. We have also gone through the judgment of the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of Hira Singh & Co. vs CIT [1998] 230 ITR 791. In the case before the Hon'ble HP High Court, the partner of the assessee firm admitted a katcha bill to the extent of Rs. 1,12,275/-. On the basis of the admission, the Tribunal upheld the addition made by the lower authorities. The High Court found that it is a question of fact and no question of law in involved. Accordingly, the reference made to the High Court was rejected. The Hon'ble High Court has no occasion to consider the statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act. Moreover, the addition was made on the basis of katcha bill found by the Revenue Authorities. In the case before us, no such bill was....