TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 524
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....raised and admitted for consideration of this court are as follows; "(i) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting additions made in the block assessment on the ground that no material was found at the time of search, when the assessee himself had admitted to the undisclosed income? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting additions made in the block assessment on the ground that no opportunity to cross-examine was granted, when no such opportunity was ever sought at any time? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in ignoring the statements recorded from the assessee, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Testing, Net profit, various credits and consequential interest payments and on-money paid on purchase of land. The provisions of s.158 BB require that undisclosed income is to be computed solely on the basis of evidence found as a result of search or requisition of books of accounts or other documents and such other materials or information as are available with the assessing officer and relatable to such evidence. On a query from the Bench, the learned Standing counsel fairly states that the additions are based only on the returns of income filed by the wife as well as various other entities that were available with the department and are not relatable to seized material. The additions thus fail and have been rightly deleted by the Tribu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essing officer sought copies of the receipt vouchers, but was informed by the assessee that he had misplaced the same. He was also requested to produce the proprietor of Ganga Jewellers for examination and verification of the transaction, but expressed his inability to do so. The sequence of events, according to the assessee, is as follows; - receipt of stock by the assessee from Ganga Jewellers on 10.8.2001 - Entry of gold by assessee in its books on 15.9.2001 - return of jewellery after manufacture by the assesee to Ganga Jewellers on 19.3.2003. 7. The admitted position was thus that neither the receipt vouchers, nor the proprietor of Ganga Jewellers could be produced before the department. Then there s the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the same as well as the retention of the gold with the assessee for more than 1 = years till the time of return to M/s Ganga Jewellers and in the light of the fact that the assessee could not produce even basic documents such as receipt vouchers, we believe that this burden has not been discharged. 9. The Commissioner of Income tax Appeals has dealt with the matter in a proper manner setting out the facts and appreciating them in the right perspective, taking note of the relevant factors pointed out in the earlier part of this order. We, thus reverse the order of the tribunal on this account and restore the order of the Commissioner of Income tax (appeals) to the effect that the explanation tendered by the assesee is a mere after thou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have taken place were only by way of accommodation for which he had received commission duly offered by him to tax. He also admitted to have issued a letter of confirmation upon request of the assesee confirming the make-believe transaction, for which he received commission. 12. The report as well as the statement of the proprietor of Brigesh Enterprises were shown to the assessee for response. As in the case of the unexplained gold, the assessee merely expressed his surprise at the statement issued by the proprietor. He further modified his earlier statement contending that out of the 175 carats of loose diamonds received by him, 54.63 carats had been returned on 27.1.2002 and the balance of 120.37 carats were still in his possession. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this aspect of the matter is merely incidental and in addition to the overwhelming evidence already available to disprove the verision of events adduced by the assessee. The totality of circumstances support the conclusion that the assessee has failed to discharge the burden cast upon him to explain the diamonds in his possession. 15. The order of the commissioner of income tax (appeals) at page 11.5 has noted the aforesaid sequence as elaborated by us, in confirming the addition. We may also mention that the assessee appears to have, on 15.4.2002, retracted the sworn statements dated 13.09.2001, 7.9.2001 and 3.11.2001. The retraction has not been accepted on the ground that it is made after inordinate delay and is not supported by any ....