TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (8) TMI 281
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 2. The facts relevant for the disposal of the two appeals may be noticed. The residential premises of assessee, Rameshwar Lal Ahuja, were searched and certain seizures were made, as per the provision of section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on June 21, 1996. Simultaneously, a survey under section 133A of the Income-tax Act was also undertaken in respect of the business premises of M/s. Beauty Palace, M/s. Unique Hotel and M/s. Pushpak Hotel in which the assessee was a partner. On the basis of the material seized during the aforesaid search and seizure operation, a notice under section 158BC of the Income-tax Act was issued to the assessee on July 3, 1996, calling upon him to furnish return for the block period April 1, 1986, to June 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; (viii) Addition on account of unexplained excess stock found as per para No. 12 above 3,16,372 (ix) Addition as discussed in para No. 13 above 10,77,980 (x) Addition as discussed in para No. 13 on page 7 1,20,000 Total 56,21,730" 3. The assessee felt aggrieved by the aforesaid order and filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, vide its order dated September 23, 1999, reduced the amount of undisclosed income from Rs. 56,21,730, as worked out by the Assessing Officer, to Rs. 50,41,260 Among others, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal allowed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y shown in his regular returns. The Tribunal accepted all the three pleas. It reduced the amount of household expenses from Rs. 8,90,000, assessed by the Assessing Officer, to Rs. 6,00,000; expenses on account of marriage from Rs. 2,00,000 to Rs. 1,00,000 and allowed deduction of Rs. 1,20,000 on account of interest accrued on the fixed deposits, which were assumed to be embedded in the total amount of fixed deposits. 6. The assessee's grievance in the present appeal is that only a sum of Rs. 1,09,493 was required to be added on account of difference between household expenses already shown by way of withdrawals and the actual expenses, nothing was required to be added on account of expenses on the marriage of the daughter of the assessee a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the facts and circumstances of the case, the additions sustained in contravention to section 158BB/158BC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, particularly when no cogent material evidence was found at the time of search and seizure and that too being first year of the hotel is legally sustainable ?" 9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the orders of the Assessing Officer as also the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. 10. First we take up the appeal filed by the Revenue. Learned counsel representing the appellants drew our attention to the relevant portion of the order of the Appellate Tribunal, which reads as follows: "The next question is as to whether the assessee is entitled to any benefit out of the income return....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... As regards the appeal filed by the assessee, no material was placed before us indicating that the additions on account of household expenses and marriage expenses, particularly sustained by the Tribunal, are not justified. The Assessing Officer in his order has observed that the family of the assessee consists of his wife, two daughters and two sons and that his children had been studying in reputed schools of Shimla town and paying handsome amount of money on account of fee. The Assessing Officer also observed that the assessee maintained high standard of living and enjoyed good social status. It has also been observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee maintains vehicles for personal use of his children. Under these circumstances....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... rate of Rs. 12,000 per annum and that at this rate the figure works out at Rs. 3,00,000 for the block period and not just Rs. 1,50,000. 15. The plea is without merit. The block period, in question, consists of ten years and a few months. At the rate of Rs. 12,000 per annum the amount of interest comes to Rs. 1,20,000 only and not Rs. 3,00,000 as is stated in the grounds of appeal. So the appellant/assessee is not entitled to any further deduction on account of the amount of interest accrued and embedded in the fixed deposits, during the block period in question. Otherwise also, the aforesaid contentions raised by the assessee do not constitute any substantial question of law. 16. Another substantial question of law, on which the appeal o....