Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 4062 2008 SLD 4062 (2008) 303 ITR 235
Madras High Court
TAX CASE (APPEAL) Nos. 2663 TO 2665 OF 2006 DECEMBER 14, 2006
P.D. DINAKARAN AND P.P.S., JANARTHANA RAJA, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

K. Bhuvanendran

Law:

Section:

Section 158B(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Block assessment in search cases - Undisclosed income Statement of assessee which was not relatable to seized material and which was subsequently retracted could not be a basis for making any addition in block assessment [A.Y. 1997-98] The wife and the two sons of the assessee purchased a commercial complex for a sum of Rs. 34 lakhs. In a statement recorded during the course of search, the assessee stated that a sum of Rs. 23 lakhs was paid over and above the registered value shown in the document and also admitted that the same would be offered as undisclosed income for the block period. Later on, the assessee did not offer this amount in the return for the block period, by a subsequent retraction by filing an affidavit. However, an addition of Rs. 23 lakhs as undisclosed income was made. The Tribunal deleted the addition. Held that there was no material found during the course of search; statement recorded from the assessee was subsequently retracted and rebutted and registered sale deed did not show any payment more than what was disclosed. In view of the above, the statement of the assessee which was not relatable to seized material and which was subsequently retracted could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment. The Tribunal had deleted the addition and no substantial question of law arose for consideration from its order. Section 158B(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Block assessment in search cases - Undisclosed income Where revenue failed to establish that there was actually on-money passed on to seller and also there was no evidence to show that there was understatement of sale consideration in document, no addition could be made in hands of seller on account of alleged payment of on-money Where the revenue failed to establish that there was actually on-money passed on to the seller and also there was no evidence to show that there was understatement of sale consideration in the document, no addition could be made in hands of seller on account of alleged payment of on-money. If the revenue is able to produce evidence to show that there was understatement of sale consideration in the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492