Jagdish Kumar Arora Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur)
ITAT Jaipur held that surrendered income during survey cannot be treated as unexplained income or money u/s. 69 & 69A of the Income Tax Act and tax in accordance with provisions of section 115BBE. The same has to be assessed to tax under ‘business income’.
Facts- The assessee is a doctor and runs the hospital in the name of JK Hospital at Bhawanimandi. Besides this he is also engaged in to the business of real estate and developers. In the assessment proceeding, AO noted that the assessee had disclosed unexplained investment in the form of sundry debtors at Rs. 2,05,00,000/- during the survey conducted on 04.07.2016. AO noted that the assessee had not disclosed that undisclosed sundry debtors u/s 69 of the Act and had not paid tax in accordance with section 115BBE of the Act. Accordingly, AO considered that income u/s. 69 of the Act and charged tax in accordance with the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Hon’ble ITAT Indore in the case of Priyadharshani Construction vs ITO (2012) 19 ITJ 276 (Trib- Indore) has held that “Substantive law shall be understood to be applicable prospectively unless made specifically retrospective. Thus, it is settled position of law that provision of section 115BBE of the Act is clearly not applicable in case of business income which is taxed under section 28 to 44 of the Income Tax Act. The assessing officer also failed to bring on records any other source of income of the appellant apart from the one that is show^i in return of income.
