2012 (5) TMI 163 - HC - Income Tax

Unexplained investment - books of account had ever been produced before any Income-tax Authority for verification - ITAT deleted the addition - held that - The source of investment was shown by the assessee by producing the relevant books of account. The books of account had contained the relevant entries for withdrawal of the amount - tribunal after considering the entire materials on record including the reasons given by the Assessing Officer and Appellate Authority has chosen to disagree and has recorded its independent findings holding that the investment is clearly reflected in the books of account produced by the assessee and has been properly explained by the assessee. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are essentially findings of fact based on material. - No substantial question of law - decided against the revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against deletion of addition of Rs.5,23,596/- by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on the grounds of proper recording of entries for investment in bank drafts in the books of account and proving the source of investment.

Analysis:
The appeal before the High Court arose from a judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal deleting the addition of Rs.5,23,596/- made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the entries for investment in the bank drafts were properly recorded in the books of account of the assessee firm and the source of investment was proved. The assessee, engaged in coal trading, had explained that the amount in the bank drafts was invested by withdrawing money from its books of account.

The Assessing Officer had raised concerns regarding the origin of the funds used to purchase the bank drafts, as they were not withdrawn from the bank and doubts were cast on the explanation provided by the assessee. However, the Tribunal disagreed with the Assessing Officer and the Appellate Authority, emphasizing that the investment was properly recorded in the books of account and the source was adequately explained.

The Tribunal's findings highlighted that the balance sheet of the firm reflected the investment in the bank drafts, and the source of funds was traced back to a withdrawal from a partner's ledger account. Citing precedent, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of supporting evidence for making additions as unexplained investments. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the entries for the bank draft investment were correctly recorded in the books of account, and the source of investment was proven.

The appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision, arguing that the Assessing Officer was justified in doubting the explanation provided by the assessee due to the absence of supporting documents like railway tickets or hotel bills. However, the High Court found that the bank drafts were prepared from a specific bank branch, and the source of investment was substantiated by the relevant entries in the books of account, including the withdrawal and deposit transactions.

Ultimately, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the findings were based on factual analysis and there was no substantial question of law to be considered in the appeal. The appeal was dismissed based on the established facts and the Tribunal's reasoned findings.