TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 1363
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....61. 2. The appellate Commissioner who considered the findings, made essentially upon remand by the ITAT, set aside the addition of Rs. 22,25,885/- attributed to the assessee. The AO had held that the additions of the amount which was not hitherto disclosed by the assessee was warranted because he had contributed in the purchase of a Lajpat Nagar property (F-18, Lajpat Nagar-II, New Delhi) by his wife. Further additions were made by the AO. 3. Search operations were conducted upon the assessee on 22.02.1996 leading to block returns. The initial assessments under Section 158BC were appealed against. Ultimately, the ITAT on 24.11.2003 remitted the matter after its initial decision was set aside by this Court under Section 260 on 21.09.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....compute the undisclosed investment in the house in the hands of the assessee and whatever the amount found and shown invested by the wife of the assessee that has to be taken in the hand of the wife of the assessee and not in the hand of the assessee as the wife of the assessee is assessed to tax regularly. It is a matter of fact, which I have verified that the Agreement to sell the same property was duly registered in the name of the wife of the appellant, Smt. Asha Chandana. There is no adverse observation in this regard by the AO as well. No new facts have been drawn by the AO to suggest whether the appellant had contributed any consideration for purchase of this property, though disclosed and undisclosed sources. In view of this, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e AO and before this authority. On careful consideration the amounts shown by the appellant in the table below are found correct: - Bank A/c Name of the Bank Date of opening Description Initial Capital 1386 State Bank of Patiala 06.11.95 By cash 5,000/- 15224 Bank of Baroda 06.05.95 By cash 5,000/- 1111 Delhi Nagrik Sehkari Bank 03.05.95 By cash 1,000/- 1913 Andhra Bank 23.04.93 By cash 1,000/- Therefore, the addition on this ground is restricted to that extant. In view of this, appeal is allowed." 6. The CIT (A) also disagreed with the AO and set aside the findings with respect to additions of Rs. 70,49,757/-. The ITAT w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Therefore, to that extent the capital has to be treated as undisclosed. The assessing officer is, therefore, directed to ascertain the factual figure of undisclosed capital contribution on the basis of opening of various bank account relating to these three concerns. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee is allowed in part." 9.2 The assessee vide letter dated 10.02.2000 submitted the opening balances of various bank accounts which are as under and filed copies of these bank accounts: Bank A/c Name of the Bank Date of opening Description Initial Capital 106374 Allahabad Bank 01.09.1995 By Cash 5,000/- 11123 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce has been found as a result of search that the assessee had made any such investment, which has been estimated by the AO at Rs. 70,49,757/-. It is an admitted fact that, assessee has been carrying on business of supply of grey cloth on wholesale basis. It is again an admitted fact that the part of the supplies made, were unrecorded. It is again an admitted fact, as in evident from the copy of an account that, the supplies were obtained by the assessee on the basis of credit and after the sale proceeds were received by the assessee the amounts payable, were paid by the assessee to the suppliers. In any case, there was substantial sufficient stocks in respect of the stocks dealt by the assessee and were duly recorded in the books of accoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lying a rate of 1.5% as against 2.5 adopted by the AO. The AO has made addition on account of undisclosed investment of Rs. 10 Lacs, which was reduced by VIT (Appeals) to Rs. 5 lacs and on the basis of theory of peak investment, the Tribunal deleted the addition. On appeal the Hon'ble High Court held that the Tribunal was correct in doing so as there was no evidence found to that the assessee has made any such investment and no addition can be made of any such amount. The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Ashok Rastogi reported in 100 CTR 204 wherein their Lordships in para 4 have held that no addition can be made unless the assessee is found to have made any investment. Reliance is also placed on the following judicial pro....