TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 127
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that a loose paper identified as MA-6/Annesure- A-2/page 37-38 was seized from the residence of the assessee during the search operation. The Assessing Officer has given the image of that loose paper in the assessment order. The assessee was asked vide notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 28.12.2012 to explain the nature and contents of the document. In response, the assessee submitted that the impugned paper, written by Rahul Sharma, contained the brief summary of future funds flow position of Rahul Sharma. It was explained that on left side of the page, tentative figures of inflow of funds in the shape of dividend, capital gains etc. have been written which were expected to be received/earned by Rahul Sharma at that point of time and on right side of the page, outflow of funds is mentioned. Some of the entries mentioned as outflow of funds were actually materialized whereas some of them were not. It was also explained that this page is basically some planning done by Rahul Sharma regarding his financial estimates. During the year the assessee had earned dividend of Rs. 1.71 Crores around other than from M/s Micromax Informatics Lt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see's bank account but assessee could not be able to explain that amounts received by him are also recorded in his books of accounts and income in this regard is duly considered for tax. In view of this, it is concluded that these are assessee's unaccounted receipts and represent his undisclosed income. Assessee has received total amount of Rs. 1,87,04,166/- (1,71,04,166+8,00,000+8,00,000) as detailed above. Therefore, Rs. 1,87,04,166/- is added to the assessee's income on account of assessee's income from undisclosed sources." 3. In appeal, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition after considering the detailed reply of assessee and relying on various decisions. The observations made by the ld. CIT(A) read as under : "8. I have gone through facts of the case, written submissions of the appellant and the findings of the Assessing Officer and considered them. I have also perused the case laws relied upon by the appellant. I find that in this case the Assessing Officer made the impugned addition on the basis of document found and seized during the course of search proceedings which was identified as MA-6/Anx. A-2/ pages 37 & 38. The Assessing Officer did not accept the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R submitted that once the assessee had admitted the impugned paper written by him and also admitted that some of the entries in the said paper are duly reflected in the books of account of assessee, there was no reason for the failure of assessee to verify the other entries of receipt and payment noted on the same paper. The assessee, thus, having failed to explain the contents of the document, the ld. CIT(A) was not justified to accept the contention of the assessee that the said document was reflecting certain future planning of fund flow of the appellant ignoring the fact that the onus that lay upon the assessee stood not discharged on its part. The ld. DR placing reliance on the presumption cast upon the assessee under section 132(4A) and sec. 292C of the Act, also relied on the following case laws : (i). CIT vs. Sonal Construction, (2012-TIOL-851-DEL. HC) (ii). CIT VS. Naresh Kumar Aggarwala, (2011) 9 taxmann.com 249 (Del.) (iii). Mahbir Prasad Rungta vs. CIT, 43 taxmann.com 328 (iv) Bhagheerath Engg. Ltd. vs. ACIT, 79 taxmann.com 325 (v). Ashok Kumar vs. CIT, 69 taxmann.com 129 (vi). Baldev Raj vs. CIT, 2 taxmann.com 335. 5. On the other hand, the ld. AR of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Income-tax Versus Buldana Urban Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. 2013 (12) TMI 237 - ITAT NAGPUR (vii). Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Sri B. Srinivasa Rao, M/s. Prathima Educational 2013 (11) TMI 826 - ITAT HYDERABAD (viii). Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Versus M/s. Rising Buildestate Pvt. Ltd., 2012 (9) TMI 252 - ITAT. JAIPUR (ix). ACIT Versus Shri OP. Bhalla 2012 m TMI 584 - ITAT DELHI (x). COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus GIRISH CHAUDHARY [2008] 296 ITR 619 (Delhi) 6. It was also submitted that there was no nexus between the right side and the left side of the notings on paper. The transactions on right side were meant for execution and those on the left side were estimates. The impugned paper nowhere depicts the receipts or payments, yet the appellant legitimately explained the entries. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified to treat undisclosed receipts of assessee based on the impugned paper without having any corroborating material either available with the Assessing Officer or found on search. It was also submitted that the assessee in his personal capacity has no dealings of any kind with any concern naming C. Ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also stated by the assessee that in the letter filed before the AO that this page contains a brief summary of future fund flow position. Thereafter, the assessee has also given explanation about the transactions stated therein. Now, in these circumstances, this document cannot be considered to be a dumb document, as considered by the first appellate authority while deleting the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer. To that extent, the contention of the Ld. DR and the reliance placed on the various judgments is correct. 7.2 Now, the question arises whether the document represents the undisclosed income of the assessee. Ongoing through this document, we note that this document has three parts. The first part is of Rs. 1,40,00,000/- whereby it has been written that the same has been "given already", which denotes the payments made by the assessee. The transaction mentioned therein has also been explained by the assessee as recorded in the books of accounts. In this regard the assessee has placed before us copy of the ledger account in the Paper Book. Thus, the contention of the Ld. DR that assessee has failed to discharge its onus that the transactions are accounted for in t....