9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 6 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained money received from buyers - money received against the sale of property - HELD THAT - Assessee has claimed that the money was received against the sale of property of ₹ 32 lakhs out of which the Department has seized ₹ 24.70 lakhs but as the registered sale deed of this property is of ₹ 15.60 lakhs, the AO was right in holding that the amount of ₹ 16.40 lakhs is unaccounted as it could not be substantiated by any document of the buyer. AO has summoned the buyer in this respect and asked for confirmation during the course of assessment proceedings but the buyer did not responds to this, hence, the explanation of the assessee that the money is received from the buyer remained unexplained, hence, addition was rightly sustained by the CIT(A). Addition on account of cash deposit - HELD THAT - Cash deposit of ₹ 4 lacs in the bank account of the assessee is transferred to Madhuban Branch and not a part of the addition made by the AO of ₹ 16.40 lacs, therefore, the addition of ₹ 4 lacs made by the AO was rightly confirmed as this cash deposit could not be explained by the assessee during the course of assessment as well as appellate proceedings. Rework the calculations of capital loss - HELD THAT - Relevant provisions does not allow set off of long term capital loss against any other head of income, hence, this claim of the assessee was rightly rejected by the authorities below. - Decided against assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Appeal against the Order of Ld. CIT(A)-21 for assessment year 2014-15. 2. Unexplained income of ?16.40 lakhs and cash deposit of ?4.00 lakhs. 3. Calculation of capital/capital loss and its treatment. 4. Validity of the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Admissibility of the grounds raised by the Assessee. Analysis: Issue 1: Appeal against the Order of Ld. CIT(A)-21 The Assessee filed an appeal against the Order of Ld. CIT(A)-21 for the assessment year 2014-15, raising multiple grounds challenging the decision of the Assessing Officer. The Assessee contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in accepting the order without proper application of mind and justification for various additions made to the income. Issue 2: Unexplained Income and Cash Deposit The Assessing Officer added ?16.40 lakhs as unexplained income and ?4.00 lakhs as cash deposit to the Assessee's income. The Assessee failed to substantiate the source of these amounts, leading to the additions. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld these additions based on the lack of documentation and non-cooperation from involved parties. Issue 3: Calculation of Capital Loss The Assessee claimed set off of long term capital loss against other income, which was rejected by the authorities citing relevant provisions disallowing such set off. The Ld. CIT(A) rightly dismissed this claim, stating that the law does not permit set off of long term capital loss against any other head of income. Issue 4: Validity of Assessing Officer's Actions The Assessing Officer's actions in making the additions were deemed appropriate as the Assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations or evidence regarding the unexplained income and cash deposit. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld these actions after considering the facts and circumstances of the case. Issue 5: Admissibility of Grounds Raised by the Assessee During the hearing, the Assessee raised various grounds challenging the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision. However, after considering the arguments from both parties and examining the records, the Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s order, concluding that the additions and rejections were justified. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Assessee's appeal, upholding the additions of unexplained income and cash deposit while rejecting the claim for set off of capital loss. The decision was based on the lack of substantiating evidence and non-compliance with tax regulations.
|
