TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (9) TMI 3
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt of an Assessing Officer and that the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of C.S.T. vs. H.M. Eusufali H.M.Abdul Ali will not apply to it? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in holding that since no hidden assets, movable or immovable, had been found, the assessee could not be expected to have made a fortune of unaccounted professional receipts?" 2. The reference relates to the block period from 1.4.1986 to 25.9.1996. 3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows: 4. The respondent assisted by his son, Dr. Sanjay Mehrotra, his wife, Dr. Bandana Mehrotra and certain other doctors, were running a pathology clinic in the capital ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The Tribunal decided the issue in assessee's favour by observing as under: "25. We have considered the matter carefully. Taking up the treatment of the two amounts of Rs. 6670/- and Rs. 85,920/-, the admitted position is that the amounts in question were collected by the employee of the doctor trio from the patients. This being so, it cannot be gainsaid that these amounts would not partake the character of receipts in their hands. Both on the principles of accounting as well as as law, the amounts in question became the receipt of the assessees. About their embezzlement, as claimed by the assessees, again it would suffice to say that whatever be the compulsion of the assessees in not taking action against their employees, a bald statem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he remaining payments from such patients. Therefore, any addition on the strength of this figure of Rs. 72,915/- cannot be made worked out. In view of the forgoing, an inference against the assessees can be drawn for not showing receipts to the tune of Rs. 92,490/- only as against the amount taken by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,65,035/-. 26. Now passing on to the multiplication formula adopted by the assessing officer, we find ourselves unable to accord our not to ti. In the first place, one should not forget that it is a search case in which a search party is supposed and expected to find out all the incriminating documents, material as also undisclosed assets. A search assessment, , much less a block assessment, therefore, stands on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....despite the extreme step of search which amounts to a serious invasion on the rights of subjects and which is perhaps the last weapon in the arsenal of the department, were found, which could be attributed to any such hypothetical receipts. In view of this we are unable to concur with the department to the multiplication formula adopted by the learned Assessing Officer. 27. In the result, what finally emerges out is the only additions of Rs. 6670/- and Rs. 85,820/-, aggregating Rs. 92,490/-, could be made in the case of doctor trio. The assessing Officer would work out the proportionate addition in the case of the appellant in the same ratio, which is individual receipt bore to the total receipts of the trio." 5. We have heard Sri R.K....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion as are available with the Assessing Officer and relatable to such evidence with certain other conditions. The emphasis has been given for determination of total income on the basis of evidence found as the result of search or requisition of books of account or other documents and such other materials or information as are available with the Assessing Officer and relatable to such evidence. It is not in dispute that in the search conducted on 25th September 1996 certain papers were found marked "B-1/23" which showed receipt of Rs. 6,670/-, Rs. 85,820/- and Rs. 72,915/-. However, there was no material to show that any other income which may have been concealed and any undisclosed assets have been found in the search. Therefore, best judg....