SATISH CHANDRA, J. - (1.) THE present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 14.5.2001 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in I.T.A. No.5645/Del/1994 for the Assessment Year 1987 -88.
(2.) THE assessee has mentioned six substantial questions of law, but all are leading to the addition of Rs.3.90 lacs, which was upheld by the Tribunal.
(3.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 16.10.1986, the assessee was traveling from Delhi to Bareilly in a Fiat Car No. UTI 2455, when he reached near Rampur octorie post, the car was intercepted by the custom authorities. On the next day, the custom authorities have recorded the statement of the Driver and the assessee. In the statement, both have stated that the assessee had gone to Delhi to sell gold and the seized amount is the consideration of the said sale. But it was observed by the custom authority vide order dated 18.12.1987 that: - "It is not established that money is the sale proceeds of smuggled gold. Even the presumption of Radha Raman dealing with gold does not arise any where." Later, the assessee has taken a different version by stating that he had gone Delhi to purchase a plot but the deal was not finalised so he had to return to Bareilly alongwith cash which was taken from the family members and the slip of each family member was attached on the bundle of currency notes. But, the A.O. was not satisfied so he made the addition of Rs.3.90 lacs. However, the first appellate authority has deleted the said addition by observing that the assessee was involved in the gold business, so the profit might have been earned. Finally, C.I.T.(A) has made the addition of Rs.40,000/ - by deleting the remaining amount. Being not satisfied both the parties have filed appeals before the Tribunal who has restored the addition of Rs.3.90 lacs by setting aside the order passed by the first appellate authority. Being aggrieved the assessee has filed the present appeal.;