2010 (4) TMI 1117 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Addition on account of unexplained investments in two plots of land.
2. Addition on account of unexplained gifts.
3. Addition on account of low household withdrawals.

Summary:

1. Addition on account of unexplained investments in two plots of land:
The assessee challenged the additions of Rs. 16,03,810/- and Rs. 8,55,000/- on account of unexplained investments in two plots of land at Pitlod, Surat, and Shivangi Bungalow respectively. The AO treated the difference between the consideration mentioned in the sale deeds and the valuation by the Stamp Valuation Authority as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the IT Act. The assessee contended that the additional stamp duty was based on notional valuation and not actual consideration paid. The CIT(A) confirmed the additions, applying the principle of section 50C of the IT Act. The ITAT held that section 50C is not applicable to the purchaser and deleted the additions, allowing ground Nos. 1 and 2 of the appeal.

2. Addition on account of unexplained gifts:
The assessee received two gifts of Rs. 50,000/- each from Shri Pawan Juthawat and Ms. Mangla Jain. The AO treated the gifts as unexplained due to the assessee's failure to provide sufficient evidence of the donors' creditworthiness and to produce the donors for verification. The CIT(A) upheld the addition. The ITAT agreed with the authorities below, noting the lack of evidence of the donors' financial capacity and the absence of any relationship or occasion for the gifts. The ITAT confirmed the addition, dismissing this ground of appeal.

3. Addition on account of low household withdrawals:
The AO made a lump sum addition of Rs. 50,000/- on account of low household withdrawals, considering the standard of living of the assessee and her family. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The ITAT found the addition unjustified as the AO did not provide any material evidence against the assessee's declared withdrawals. The ITAT deleted the addition, allowing this ground of appeal.

Conclusion:
The appeal of the assessee was partly allowed, with the ITAT deleting the additions on account of unexplained investments and low household withdrawals, but confirming the addition on account of unexplained gifts.