Case Law Details
ACIT Vs Atul Kumar Gupta (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi held that addition is made on the basis of documents found from the separate search at another person. Accordingly, assessment should have been done under section 153C of the Income Tax Act and not under section 153A of the Income Tax Act.
Facts- AO noted that during the course of search and post-search, it is found that assessee and Shri Rajiv Gupta are co-directors in many companies. In many of these companies, there were substantial amount in the share premium reserves which have been utilized for making investment in immovable and movable properties. AO noted that the facts of companies owned by the assessee wherein substantial investments have been made by the assessee were confronted during the course of assessment proceedings vide questionnaire.
Assessee responded only that Rajiv Gupta is not my brother. It was further stated that there was substantial amount of premium in various companies referred to. It was submitted that the question is also not relevant so far as 153A assessment is concerned.
AO opined that from the submissions, it is clear that assessee has nothing to explain. Further, assessee has not denied his shareholdings in the companies. Hence AO was of the opinion that a part of assessee in the shareholdings in those companies is held to be unexplained in the absence of any explanation and documentary evidence supplied by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings despite providing sufficient opportunities. Thereafter, the AO made various additions on this ground of suppression of purchase price in various investments
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
