TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1103
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../Del./2017 for the Assessment Year 2006-07 and ITA No. 6648/Del./2017 & ITA No 6269 /Del./2017 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. The relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced hereinbelow:- "24. Be that as it may, the question which needs to be highlighted is that even assuming that the statement of the assessee is paramount and sacrosanct, then there is no denial by the revenue authorities that the assessee has honoured his statement and offered Rs.2,23,68,000/- in his return of income for A.Y 20078-08 and has paid taxes thereon. In all his submissions made during the course of assessment proceedings and highlighted by us elsewhere, the assessee was constantly stating that this peak credit was calculated by the tax authorities a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Accordingly, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 6269 and 6268/DEL/2017 are allowed." 2. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,05,50,545/- and Rs.18,58,311/- under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') on account of peak balance pertaining to Financial Year 2005-06 (Assessment Year 2006-07) and Financial Year 2006-07 (Assessment Year 2007-08) respectively, in the bank account maintained by assessee with HSBC Geneva. He states that the ITAT has erred in holding that there is no loss to revenue as assessee has shown the said income for Assessment Year 2007-08 and paid taxes on such undisclosed income. He contends that the ITAT has erred in holding that the issue of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t year, as computed in terms of the Act, the method adopted by the assessee has been found to be such that the income cannot properly be deduced therefrom. It is, therefore, not only the right but the duty of the Assessing Officer to act in exercise of his statutory power, for determining what, in his opinion, is the correct taxable income." 3. Per contra, learned senior counsel for the Respondnet, who appears on advance notice, states that the sole basis for the addition is the admission in the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act and the alleged sheets received from the French government under DTAC. He points out that the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has vide order dated 28th June, 2021 discharged the assessee u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, then also there is no denial by the revenue authorities that the assessee has honoured his statement and offered Rs.2,23,68,000/- in his return of income for the Assesment Year 2007-08 and has paid taxes thereon. 5. Further, the peak credit had been calculated by the tax authorities and at the behest of the tax authorities, the assessee had offered the amount calculated by them in his income for the Assessmeng Year 2007-08 and paid taxes thereon, which return of income has been accepted by the Revenue. 6. Since the tax rate in both the Assessment Years i.e. 2006-07 and 2007-08 was same, this Court is of the view that if the present appeals are allowed and an amount of Rs.2,05,50,545/- is added to the assessee's income in the assessment....