2022 (10) TMI 660

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct 1961 (for short 'the Act'). The details of the year of assessment, date of orders etc., are stated in the following table: Sl. No. Assessment Year & Date of Assessment Order Order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITA No. 1 2009-10; 30.12.2011 ITA C-140-146/Cent/CIT(A)/ IV/ 2011-12 dt.31.03.2016 ITA 419/C/2016 dt.23.04.2018 69/2018 2 2004-05; 30.12.2011 ITA C-140-146/Cent/CIT(A)/ IV/ 2011-12 dt.31.03.2016 ITA 420/C/2016 dt.23.04.2018 70/2018 2.1 On 05.11.2009 search was undertaken at the residential premises of one K.A. Rouf and his associates. The Revenue seized a few documents from the business premises of the assessee. The documents recovered from the search are the Profit and Loss ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s justified in rejecting the claim of appellant that the assessing authority has not rejected the audit report and final statement of accounts based on valid materials? B: WHETHER the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessment has been finalized on the draft profit and loss account found at the time of the search when he himself had made adjustments before arriving at the net income? C: WHETHER the assessing authority should not have called for the specific explanations with regard to the differences noticed between the final audited statements and the draft statement found at the time of search? I.T.A. No.70/2018 A: WHETHER the Appellate Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of appellant that the assessing ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he years are vitiated, liable to be interfered with and set aside. 5. Mr Jose Joseph argues that the basis for the addition is the material seized from the business premises of the assessee. The assessee is not disputing the source or custody of the documents. The material was put to the assessee to explain the figures already relied on and the actual amount under these two heads noted in the material seized from the business premises. The material seized has presumption under Section 132 of the Act. The assessee was called upon to explain the contradictory figures. There is no reply from the assessee. Under those circumstances, the Assessing Officer is justified in making the best judgment on the material seized from the custody of the as....