TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (5) TMI 44
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. yr. 1978-79. During assessment proceedings for asst. yr. 1978-79 the assessee was called upon to explain the source of this amount of Rs. 1,24,500. The assessee submitted reply on 27th Feb., 1990 and also filed an affidavit to the effect that in the year 1977 the assessee contested the election and spent Rs. 14,000 on the election and bad filed return regarding the same before the Election Tribunal, which has got wide powers in that regard. He denied having spent the amount of Rs. 1,24,500 on the election. The note book was said to be not written in the handwriting of the assessee or any members of his family. It was also the case of the assessee that during election it was not the candidate only who spent money on election but most of the expenditure was incurred by party workers who collected the amount themselves and spent it for the benefit of their party. He stated to have received Rs. 1,000 from one Shri V.K. Gupta. The AO considered the submissions of the assessee and did not find force in the same on the ground that no details of the person who spent the amount was given in the affidavit and he made the addition of that amount in asst. yr. 1978-79. 3. The assessee cam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts or other documents found in possession or control of any person during the course of search. No cognizance of the said paper was taken in the order under s. 132(5). It is also the case of the assessee that the said paper was written on the pad of Sahkari Grah Nirman Samiti (P) Ltd. and it does not contain the name of the assessee. The AO has not made any effort to link the said document with the assessee. No. addition was warranted. Thus, the CIT(A) duly found force in the submissions of the assessee and concluded that there is nothing on record to link the assessee with the pad of the said co-operative housing society or the said co-operative housing society belonged to the assessee. He also noted that the assessee was leading political life and there were several persons visiting him and that paper cannot be taken as belonging to the assessee without making necessary investigation, which the AO failed to carry out and the deleted the addition of Rs. 96,955, and the Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. In asst. yrs. 1980-81 and 1981-82 the AO made the addition in respect of interest on Rs. 90,000 which was calculated on the pad of Sahkari Garh Nirman Samiti (P) Ltd. and the CI....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the search that relevant papers were found from the possession of the assessee and were seized on the basis of which the AO had made the addition. The onus was on the assessee to disprove the entries contained in each of the documents, which had been vaguely explained. About the entry relating to note book showing expenditure incurred for contesting the election during the previous year relevant to asst. yr. 1978-79, the contention of the AO was that necessary details of receipt and expenditure were shown in the said note book and the assessee had filed affidavit to show that he had not spent the amount beyond Rs. 44,000 for which he submitted written explanation but he was under obligation to take out the necessary details of donations, details of expenditure incurred by friends, relatives and party workers, which he failed. No doubt list of persons was there but the AO did not summon them and in case the CIT(A) was of the opinion that necessary enquiries were to be made, the matter should have been restored back to the file of the AO by the CIT(A) for finding out the truth. He also submitted that now it would be in the fitness of things to restore the matter to the AO to examin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amount of expenses was more than Rs. 14,000 as shown by the assessee and no basis for making the addition in the case of the assessee on the basis of that note book. The presumption under s. 132(4A) of the Act has been rebutted by the assessee and no addition is warranted and the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. 8.1. About addition on the basis of calculation of interest on Rs. 90,000 on the pad of Sahkari Grah Samiti Ltd. Agra, it was also the case of the assessee that there were so many persons visiting the assessee as the assessee was a politician and some person might have left the paper with him but in the absence of any evidence from the AO to link the assessee with that paper, the addition was rightly deleted by the CIT(A) along with the interest. 8.2. About the cheque counterfoil, it was submitted the assessee was having no account with IOB, Agra and if the addition was to be made, the AO was under obligation to find out the actual person, who was owner of Account No. 27969 and in the absence of anything on record, addition was not warranted. 8.3. About the Dharam Kanta receipt, the same were the arguments as were taken before the lower authorities and in t....