2002-VIL-389-DEL-DT

Equivalent Citation: [2002] 254 ITR 261, 174 CTR 476, 123 TAXMANN 772

DELHI HIGH COURT

Date: 15.01.2002

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Vs

DR. S. BHARTI

BENCH

Judge(s)  : DEVINDER GUPTA., VIKRAMAJIT SEN.

JUDGMENT

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned order and the proposed question of law. In view of the following findings, we are of the view, no substantial question arises for determination.

"The Revenue has failed to prove that the assessee had made any undisclosed investment in the properties named above. Thus, concurring with the findings given in the cases referred to by learned counsel, we hold that the Assessing Officer was not justified in making any addition on account of undisclosed investment in any of the five properties. Thus, the additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of undisclosed investment in the house properties are deleted."

"When the amount of Rs.21 lakhs was found in the locker in the Bank of Maharashtra and further sum of Rs.1.89 lakhs was found in Locker No. 362 in the Allahabad Bank, these amounts could be easily said to have come from professional receipts only. No other activities are being done by the assessee. Thus, the natural conclusion is that the cash amount found in these two lockers as well as the cash amount found during the course of search at the premises No. 18/49, East Patel Nagar, have come out of professional receipts only. As these amounts have already been considered and taken by the assessee while filing the return in response to notice under section 158BC of the Act, no separate addition on account of suppressed professional receipts was called for."

Dismissed.

 

DISCLAIMER: Though all efforts have been made to reproduce the order accurately and correctly however the access, usage and circulation is subject to the condition that VATinfoline Multimedia is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake/error/omissions.