The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled that the Income Tax Addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act,1961 does not become valid in the absence of any books of account.
The Assessing Officer for the course of assessment proceedings remarked under the written Page No 7 of Annexure A/PMB/O1 (pages I to 58) seized via the taxpayer’s residence, an amount of Rs 51,80,000 is obtained via the taxpayer dated 13/05/2011.
The AO remarked the taxpayer for the search action had publicized Rs 15 crores as other income for distinct assessment years vide his statement recorded u/s 132(4) dated 20-11-2014 and resumed on 2011-2014. The mentioned other income of Rs 15,00,00,000 was again recognized via taxpayer vide his illustration provided to the DDIT(Inv) Unit l|(1), Hyderabad, it indeed incur the addition of the cash receipts of Rs. 51,80,000 since his undisclosed income and obtained within tax.
Recommended: ITAT Chandigarh Allows Manual Submission of Required Documents
To CIT (A), the taxpayer, no such amount was obtained and the receipts do not concern the taxpayer.
The same seized paper does not have the writing of the taxpayer and there is no sign of the taxpayer on the paper. As the same would be a dumb document without any real value. The CIT (A) maintained the addition post taking the report of remand via the assessing Officer and a rejoinder of the taxpayer to these remand reports.
Taxpayer, it is not an unaccounted receipt however it is on account of the sale of land and the taxpayer has claimed these receipts as income tax exemption. In the absence of maintenance of any books of account via the taxpayer, there is no addition under section, 68 that could incur. It contented, the taxpayer does not maintain any books of account and hence, the provisions of section 68 do not secure any application.
The ITAT bench comprises Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member, and Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member sees, the taxpayer does not maintain any books of account, hence the addition of that under income tax section 68 is not permissible.
It is seen that, if the taxpayer is doing transactions with one Shri T. Jangaiah and he is involved in the real estate business, he should earn some income. As the total amount of receipts along with the cheque, the receipt amounts to the profit of Rs.51,80,000 at the 10% rate of the addition of Rs.51,80,000 as against Rs.51,80,000 which the Assessing Officer incurred and upheld via the CIT (A) was sustained while partly permits the petition.
| Case Title | Shri Pujala Mahesh Babu Vs A.C.I.T. Central |
| Date | 26/09/2022 |
| Assessee by | Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate |
| Revenue by | Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,DR |
| Citation | ITA No. 132 133 126 134 & 135 |
| Mumbai ITAT | Read Order |
