M/S Lamba Builders v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rohtak And Another …

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 19.9.2011 (i)ITA No. 33 of 2002 M/s Lamba Builders …..Appellant vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak and another …..Respondents (ii)ITA No. 34 of 2002 M/s Lamba Builders…..Appellant Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak and another …..Respondents CORAM: -HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTAHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: - Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for respondents. HEMANT GUPTA, J This order shall dispose of ITA No. 33 of 2002pertaining to Assessment year 1987-1988 and ITA No. 34 of2002 pertaining to Assessment year 1988-1989, whereby thecash credit entries in the name of minors were found to beunexplained and thus added in the income of the firm. Prior to the Assessment years, in question, fourminor children i.e., Baby Payal, Vimmi, Master Hunny andBaby Nancy declared certain amount for taxation under the Amnesty Scheme for the Assessment year 1984-1985, 1985-1986 and 1986-1987. Learned Assessing Officer found thatthere is no evidence with regard to the receipt of gifts etc., bythe minors and that the Amnesty Scheme was applicable tothe persons who have not declared their income. The Schemewas not applicable for declaring the income in respect ofanother person though cash income belongs to a differentperson. The Assessing Officer relied upon a judgment ofHon’ble the Supreme Court reported as 130 ITR 244, M/sJamna Parshad Kanhya Lal vs. CITthat immunity wasconferred to the declarant and that there was investigationsinto the true nature and source of the credits. On the basis ofthe said fact, the Assessing Officer found that the cash creditentries in the name of four minors in the books of the firm areunexplained and were thus added to the income of the firm. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) on 17.6.2001 returned a finding that the AmnestyScheme could not be availed by the minors who have notearned any income and therefore, the arguments of theassesses based upon the furnishing of declaration by theminors in the Amnesty Scheme was negated. In furtherappeal, learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarhaffirmed the findings and found that assesses have introducedtheir unaccounted income in the form of credits in the book ofaccounts of the firm. The Tribunal returned the followingfindings: - “….In this case, it is obvious that amounts havebeen introduced in the names of minor children ofthe partners. It is also established that none of thechildren had an independent source of incomeand they were in the age group varying from 4 to17 years. The claim of the assessee that amountsrepresented gifts received in view of the fact thatno evidence whatsoever has been established.Thus, the uncontroverted position emerging fromthe facts of the case is that source of credits in thenames of minor children has not beenestablished.” Before this Court, learned counsel for the appellanthas raised the same arguments as were raised were before theTribunal. We do not find that any substantial question of lawarises for consideration in view of the findings recorded thatthe appellant have not disclosed the source of credit in thename of minor children and that the benefit of AmnestyScheme could not be claimed by the minors without declaringthe sources of their income. Dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA)JUDGE (JASWANT SINGH)JUDGE