During search, cash of Rs. 7,52,50,500 was found at the assessee’s residence, of which he admitted Rs. 5,52,50,000 as undisclosed income but claimed the balance Rs. 2 crores belonged to the H group; his settlement application was rejected, following which the AO taxed the disclosed income year-wise as offered before the Settlement Commission and also taxed the same income again for assessment year 2014-15, which was upheld by the CIT(A). On appeal, the Tribunal held that since the H group had also claimed the Rs. 2 crores and sought advance tax credit therefore, the same sum could not be taxed twice, and remanded the matter for verification; it further held that taxing the same income both year-wise before the Settlement Commission and again for assessment year 2014-15 amounted to double taxation, absent any evidence of the income being earned in the years disclosed, and remanded the matter for de novo assessment.(AY. 2008-09 , 2010-11,to 2014-15)
Sachin Vilas Chaugule v. CIT (2025) 132 ITR 153 (Mum) (Trib.)
S. 153A : Assessment-Search-Cash found at assessee’s residence claimed to belong to third party (H group)-H group also claiming the sum and seeking advance tax credit thereof-Same amount cannot be taxed twice-Matter remanded for verification-Income disclosed before Settlement Commission spread year-wise-Petition rejected-Same income taxed again for assessment year 2014-15-Double taxation-Matter remanded for de novo assessment. [S. 132, 132(4), 245D(1)]
Leave a Reply