TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 1510
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to 6 - The grievance of the assessee relates to the sustenance of addition of Rs. 4,60,000/- made by the A.O. 4. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee enjoyed the income from salary, house property, capital gain and from other sources. The assessee filed the return of income declaring income of Rs. 3,60,000/-, later on a search and seizure operations u/s 103 read with section 165 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the C.B.I at the residential premises of the assessee and his wife which was followed by searches at bank lockers, was conducted on 10.07.2003 on the premises of the assessee and his bank lockers. As a result of the search following amount of Indian currency was recovered and seized :- i) From flat no. V-10. Satya Sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,000) the ld. CIT(A) allowed the deduction of Rs. 60,000 being amount of cash balance in hands, out of past savings. Now the assessee is in appeal. 7. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that locker no. 9 was in the joint name of the assessee and his wife and prior to the date of search i.e. on 10.07.2003, locker has been operated 7 times and on all the occasions wife of the assessee Smt. Vineeta Singh operated the locker. Reference was made to page no. 237 and 238 of the assessee's paper book. It was accordingly submitted that the addition sustained of Rs. 3,00,000/- found from the locker no. 9 State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur in the hands of the assessee was fully unwarranted and liable to be deleted. It was further submitted tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 11. Omar Salay Mohammad Sait vs. CIT . 37 ITR 151(SC) 12. Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. CIT, 26 ITR 736 (SC), 13. Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Itd. Vs. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC) 14. Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT 37 ITR 288 (SC) 7. In his rival submissions, the ld. DR strongly supported the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and further submitted that since the amount was recovered from the common residence of the assessee and the locker in the joint name of the assessee and his wife. Therefore, the cash belonged to the assessee and was rightly added in the hands of the assessee on substantive basis. 8. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the presen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... statement Smt. Vineeta Singh stated that the cash which had been seized by the CBI was not reflected in accounts and out of that only 40,000/- cash belonged to her husband Shri Tribhuvan Singh and rest was either her money or was with her as trust money. The statement of Shri Tribhuvan Singh (the assessee) was also recorded copy of which is placed at page nos. 149 to 152 of the assessee's paper book, in the said statement, the assessee also stated that only Rs. 40,000/- belonged to him and the balance money either belonged to his wife or was the trust money with her. From the above statements, it is clear that Smt. Vineeta Singh owned the money which was found during the course of search. Therefore, the AO made the addition of the said amo....