2015 (9) TMI 1295 - AT - Income Tax

Addition of refund of flat booked as unexplained sources of the appellant - addition on unexplained credits - Held that - Allotment letters etc. from the society were not easily available because the same were old records and i.e. why the same could not be filed before CIT(A). He made a prayer that since documents go the route of the addition, therefore, the same may be admitted.We are of the opinion that these documents go to the route of the matter and therefore in the interest of justice the same should be admitted as additional evidence. However, at the same time we do not find any force for admission of additional evidence in respect of documents N-5 i.e. gift deed because no particular reason has been given before us why this gift deed could not be obtained earlier. Therefore, we admit to the documents. Thus we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer to reexamine the issue in the light of the additional evidence and then decide the same in accordance with law Addition of deposits in bank during the year as unexplained credits - Held that - Surplus cash is available with the assessee. The sum of ₹ 10,000/- can be said to be easily available from withdrawals of ₹ 2,85,000/- on 22.5.2006. Similarly, deposit of ₹ 50,000/- on 7.2.2007 can be easily explained from the withdrawals of ₹ 50,000/- on 15.1.2007. Therefore, in our opinion this addition is required to be deleted and accordingly we set aside the order of CIT(A) and delete the same. Addition on deposits in bank during the year as unexplained credits - Held that - CIT(A) has not given detailed reasons for rejection of these two items. Once the confirmation was filed and if Assessing Officer had any doubt he could have asked for further information. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file for reexamination of these entries. The Assessing Officer should decide the issue in respect of these two entries after obtaining confirmation etc. in accordance with law. Addition on deposits in bank during the year as unexplained credits - assessee submitted that CIT(A) has already accepted the another gift of ₹ 5 lakhs from the sister then he should have accepted this gift also. - Held that - We do not find any force in the submissions of Ld. Counsel for the assessee. First of all, we have already rejected the admission of additional evidence in the form of gift deed in respect of this gift deed because Ld. Counsel could not give any reason why the same was not produced before Assessing Officer or CIT(A). Secondly, wherever the assessee has filed proper certificate, Ld. CIT(A) has already deleted the addition and if no confirmation is available for a particular gift, then same cannot be allowed simply because the other gifts have been accepted. Therefore, we upheld the order of Ld. CIT(A) in this respect and confirm the addition

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Addition of Rs. 10,00,000 on account of refund of flat booked as unexplained sources.
2. Addition of Rs. 10,000, Rs. 50,000, Rs. 7,18,685, Rs. 11,41,760, Rs. 1,75,000, and Rs. 4,00,000 as unexplained credits in bank deposits.
3. Addition of Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 50,000 in cash deposits in the bank account.
4. Addition of Rs. 7,18,685 and Rs. 4,00,000 as unexplained deposits.
5. Addition of Rs. 1,75,000 as an unexplained deposit received as a gift.

Issue 1 - Refund of Flat Booked:
The appellant challenged the addition of Rs. 10,00,000 as a refund of a flat booked as unexplained income. The CIT(A) upheld this addition. The appellant later submitted additional evidence to support the source of the deposit, which was accepted by the tribunal. The tribunal admitted the documents and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reexamination based on the new evidence.

Issue 2 - Unexplained Bank Credits:
Multiple unexplained credits in bank deposits were challenged by the appellant. The tribunal found that certain deposits were adequately explained through withdrawals and remanded others for further verification. The tribunal set aside the CIT(A) order for a reexamination based on the additional evidence provided by the appellant.

Issue 3 - Unexplained Cash Deposits:
The appellant contested the addition of Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 50,000 in cash deposits in the bank account. The tribunal reviewed the cash withdrawal and deposit entries and concluded that the additions were not justified. The tribunal deleted the additions after finding that the cash deposits were adequately explained by corresponding cash withdrawals.

Issue 4 - Unexplained Deposits:
The tribunal examined the additions of Rs. 7,18,685 and Rs. 4,00,000 as unexplained deposits. The CIT(A) had confirmed these additions due to lack of confirmation. The tribunal remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reexamination, emphasizing the need for proper verification and confirmation of the entries.

Issue 5 - Unexplained Gift Deposit:
The appellant disputed the addition of Rs. 1,75,000 as an unexplained gift deposit. The CIT(A) rejected the explanation due to the absence of confirmation. The tribunal upheld this decision, stating that lack of confirmation for a specific gift could not be overlooked based on acceptance of other gifts. The addition of Rs. 1,75,000 was confirmed by the tribunal.

In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remanding certain issues back to the Assessing Officer for reexamination based on additional evidence provided by the appellant. The tribunal emphasized the importance of proper verification and confirmation in determining the legitimacy of various deposits and credits.