Rajendra Agarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards undisclosed income rightly sustained since assessee failed to explain the incriminating material found during the course of search. Penalty under section 271AAB too sustained.
Facts- The assessee runs a proprietorship concern, under the name and style of M/s D.K. & Company, while engaged in the business of trading of TT bars and also manufacturing gold and silver jewellery items. In the course of search, two documents are stated to have been recovered from the residential premises.
On completion of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer analysed and decoded the contents of the two documents, and made addition of Rs. 1,18,83,333/- in AY 2013-14 and addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- in AY 2014-15. Penalty u/s. 271AAB(1) for Rs. 35,65,000/- was also levied.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal upholding levy of penalty on minimum rate of 30% of the undisclosed income. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Held that when the assessee failed to explain the incriminating material as available in the two incriminating documents, the authorities below have rightly arrived at the conclusion that the said transactions were of income of the assessee, which he failed to explain, and as such, said additions deserve to be upheld.
