TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (6) TMI 205
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsel appearing for the respondents-assessees. 2. The residential premises of one Sri. T. George and Sri. M. Syed Alavi, were searched by the Department on 25.6.1987. During search, statements were recorded from these persons under Section 132 (4) of the I.T. Act. From the seized records it was found that these two persons were engaged in contract work for slaughter tapping and sale of rubber trees from two rubber estates, namely, Vijaya Estate, and Mukkattumala Estate. The assessees did not co-operate in the assessments, which is clear from the findings recorded by the assessing officer. Assessments were made based on entries in the seized records and available evidence including statements recorded from the assessees. When Section 147 n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case of assessment completed in the name of association of persons for the assessment year 1987-88. We therefore proceed to consider the main case, that is, I.T.A. No. 11 of 2002 pertaining to assessment of association of persons for the assessment year 1986-87. 3. The basis for making income escaping assessment is the search carried out in the residential premises of two persons, namely, T. George and M. Syed Alavi. Even though the Tribunal has not considered the documents seized on search containing entries pertaining to income and expenditure in contract work undertaken by respondents-assessees, the same is discussed in the order of assessment as well as in the first appellate order. We notice from the orders of the assessing officer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ands discredited by reasoned order issued by the assessing officer and the first appellate authority. In fact the first appellate authority referred to the seized notices issued by the owner of the Estate against one of the members of the association of persons prohibiting him from entering the Estate for default in payment of agreed instalments. Even after concrete documentary evidence was recovered by the department, which led to assessment of income from business of slaughter tapping undertaken by the assessees, the assessees denied the transactions by proving with orders of Agrl. Income Tax Tribunal that slaughter tapping was done by the owner of the Estate himself. It is to be noted that accounts seized from both members of association....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment. On the whole, we find that the case of slaughter of tapping by the assessees is established beyond any doubt. Even though Tribunal has held that there is nothing to indicate the intention of the members of association of persons to carry on the business together, the accounts seized from the assessees prove beyond doubt that both undertook business together, carried on the business together and shared the profit. Status of association of persons need not be proved through an agreement. Moreover, since in this case, business carried on by members together is proved through accounts recovered on search, the assessment of assessees in that status is perfectly justified. We find the Tribunal has allowed the appeal on two grounds, that is ....