Case Law Details
Supraja’s Sandy Lane Bar & Restaurant Vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam)
As per 153C of Income Tax Act for invoking jurisdiction, there must be incriminating material found and seized during the course of search in form of money, bullion, jewellery or the evidences indicating the inflation of e expenditure or undisclosed investments or suppression of Income.etc. As per the satisfaction note, the notice under section 153C was issued basing on the material found and seized during the search in the residential premises of A.T. Rayudu and Group bearing No. ATR/B/21 page No. 27-31. On verification of the seized material it was an account copy of the State Bank of Hyderabad bank account for the period from 8-7-2006 to 16-8-2006 which was maintained by the assessee. The learned Authorised Representative argued that the seized material does not belong to the assessee. Though the contention of the learned Authorized Representative is not acceptable as discussed in earlier paragraphs, on going through the assessment order passed by the assessing officer, there was no reference to the seized material in the assessment order for making any addition. The assessing officer has made the following additions in the assessment order
(1) Business income estimated Rs. 15,84,291
(2) Unexplained expenses under section 69C towards pre operative expenses Rs. 7,98,101
(3) Unexplained expenses under section 69C towards rent payment of Rs. 6,48,000
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
