MAHENDRA CHIMANLAL SHAH Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
B.M. Kothari, Accountant Member -
(1.) ALL these appeals relate to the same assessee and pertain to same assessment year, namely, A.Y. 1988-89. Hence these are being disposed of by this common order.
(2.) We will first consider the quantum appeal relating to the assessment order passed under Section 143(3). Search operations were conducted under Section 132 on 3rd July, 1987 at the premises of one M/s. Dinal Gems, 303 Panchratna, Opera House, Bombay where the appellant was also present. On his personal search diamonds worth Rs. 5,06,712 were found and seized. Savings bank pay-in-slips of Bank of India, Opera House branch were also found from the appellant's possession in which deposits aggregating to Rs. 1,01,100 were found, These pay-in-slips were also seized. In the statement recorded during the course search under Section 132(4), the appellant offered income represented by the value of diamonds amounting to Rs. 5,06,712 and Rs. 1,01,100 represented various deposits in the said bank account.
The assessee submitted a return of income on 17-10-1989, declaring total income of Rs. 20,880. Thus the amount of income surrendered in the statement under Section 132(4) during the course of search was not included in the income declared in the original return of income.
(3.) THEREAFTER, a revised return was submitted on 27-9-1990, declaring total income of Rs. 5,27,600. In this revised return, the assessee included a sum of Rs. 5,06,712 being the value of diamonds found from his possession during the course of said search.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.