2018 (4) TMI 21

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A.R. of the assessee pleaded to take grounds on merit and grievance with regard to merit is that the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition of Rs. 12,04,938/- on account of unexplained investment, though it was confirmed that the amount belonged to M/s R. K. G. Cold Storage & Ice Factory. The grievance of the assessee is also that addition was made without any corroborating evidence that the expenditure belongs to the assessee and without examining the nature of expenditure as appearing at page 33 of LP-6. 3. The brief facts are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was specifically asked to explain the nature and source of the amount of Rs. 12,04,938/- mentioned on page no. 33 of LP-6 seized during the course of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed his return of income at total income of Rs. 5,24,820/-. The assessee war deriving income from business being partner in the firms and also 'ncomefrom other sources. 2. The A. O has taken action u/s 148 vide notice dated 30-03- 2015, compliance of the same was made in time. Assessment has been completed u/s 143(3)/148 of the I.T Act. There only one addition u/ 69C in this case which is based on seized paper No. 33 of LP-6 seized from the possession of Harish Chandra Jaiswal. The family members of the assessee are partner of the firm M/s RKJ Cold Storage & Ice Factory. 3. That during the course of assessment proceeding assessee has filed reply dated 01-01-2016 along with confirmation dated 01-01- 2016 from M/s. RKJ Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... firm which is also income tax payer." 5. The ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently argued that the seized paper does not belong to him, but belongs to the firm i.e. M/s R. K. G. Cold Storage & Ice Factory. The ld. A.R. of the assessee further argued that he has submitted copy of affidavit before the Assessing Officer which confirms that the impugned seized document does not belong to the assessee but belongs to M/s R. K. G. Cold Storage & Ice Factory. 6. At the time of hearing before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently argued that the amount contained in the sized paper was substantiated by the affidavit filed before the Assessing Officer that it belongs to someone else and not to the assessee. The fact being shown in the form ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ice Factory and not to the assessee. The Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) should have made independent enquiry with regard to the said executor of the affidavit i.e. M/s R. K. G. Cold Storage & Ice Factory whether the statement is genuine or not. But this cannot be the ground to make addition in the hands of the assessee. We also find that the seized document was also not corroborated by any other supporting evidence which can take stand against the assessee. Here in this case where simply a loose document was found and on that basis addition was made. This is not permitted within the periphery of the Income-tax Act. 10. In the case of S.P. Goyal vs. DCIT (supra), following the ratio of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CBI ....