Itta/28/2009 Of Sri. Gyankumar Agarwal ( Ind) v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE H0N’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU I.T.T.A. No.28 OF 1999 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is preferred against the judgment andorder dated 11.03.2009 of the learned Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ‘B’, Hyderabad. 2 . This Court, by order, dated 01-12-1999,admitted the appeal on the following substantial questionof law: “Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, theAppellate Tribunal is justified in deleting the addition ofRs.82,13,065/- made in Block Assessment on the purportedground that no material pertaining to the transactions has beenseized in the course of search under Section 13 of theI.T.Act.?” 3 . We have heard Mr.S.R.Ashok, learned counselappearing for the appellant and gone through the impugnedjudgment and order of the learned Tribunal. 4. The learned Tribunal, on fact, found that none of theitems tabulated in the order, is liable to be treated as undisclosedincome in the course of block assessment under Section 158 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, and that while disallowance ofRs.80,00,000/- towards service charges claimed as paid toT.Rama Murthy, was made on the ground that the assessee hadnot availed any service so as to warrant such a huge payment ofservice charges, thus doubting the genuineness of the paymentclaimed, and that all the four other disallowances were made onthe grounds of unreasonableness of the amounts claimed in thebooks of account, and inadmissible nature of the expenditureclaimed. It is further held by the learned Tribunal that, thesedisallowances were made on the basis of the entries in the booksof account regularly maintained by the assessee in its regular course of business and the finalized statements of account, suchas profit and loss account etc., and even the returns filed for theyears covered by the block assessment in normal course, and thatthe information leading to the disallowance is not obtained fromany entry in the assessing officer has access even otherwise thanthrough material found at the time of search operations. 5. It is settled proposition of law that addition can bemade on profit assessment, if such amount is tallying with anymaterial, which was found at the time of search operations. It isnot the case here. Hence, we do not find any merit in this appeal. 6. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as tocosts. 7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appealshall stand closed. _____________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _______________ K.C.BHANU, J 23.7.2013DRK/HSD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTISENGUPTA AND THE H0N’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU I.T.T.A. No.28 OF 1999 (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)