COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. JEEVA RAJA (DIED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above Tax Case (Appeal) is filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 2005 -06 by raising following substantial question of law:

(2.) THE assessee filed her return of income admitting total income of Rs.186/ -. The return was processed under Section 143 (1) of the Income Tax Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices under Section 143(2) were issued, calling for details. The assessee furnished the details regarding the deposits and withdrawals from the bank account of City Union Bank, T.Nagar, along with bank statement. It was also found that the assessee was a Partner in Raja Musical Universal and Illayaraja Multinational and those firms had no activity from the previous year relating to the assessment year 2005 -06. It also stated that although she was employed by her husband for managing his office, during 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2005, she was not well and had not received any salary. However, the facts found were contrary to the assertion. An opportunity was given to the assessee as well as to the firm for furnishing the assessment details, copy of confirmation/account copy, nature of business carried on, nature of services rendered by the assessee along with the copy of return filed by the company. However, the same were not furnished by the assessee for perusal. On going through the details furnished, it was found that the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.18,28,328/ - in the bank and had loans and liabilities to the tune of Rs.2,82,84,312/ -. On calling for further details on cash deposits, it was found that they were not from the account of M/s.Ilayaraja Multinational. On further verification, the Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that the said sum was assessable as unexplained investment under Section 69 under the head "income from other sources". Further, it was also found that the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.24,07,300/ - in Hongkong and Shanghai Corporation Ltd. When it was pointed out that the deposits of Rs.60,57,212/ - had no correlation to the interest income of Rs.186/ - admitted in the return, the authorised representative of the assessee agreed that the deposits of Rs.60,57,212/ - in various banks be added to the assessee's income. The assessee also wrote a letter dated 24.12.2007 filed on 26.12.2007 to this end. Thus, the assessment was completed to include a sum of Rs.60,57,212/ - as income from other sources.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the same, the Revenue went on appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, after referring to the letter written by the assessee offering the deposits in the bank for assessment, recorded its impression as follows: -