2021 (2) TMI 1087 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 69 - assessee had made payments for purchase of property, whereas it was a family transfer and no consideration exchanged hands - new evidences in the form of copy of Girdawari, Court decree of agriculture land submitted by assessee - HELD THAT - Additional evidence now furnished by the assessee in the form of copy of Khasra Girdawari, Court decree dt. 24/11/2019 go to the root of the matter, so these new additional evidences are admitted. However the additional evidences, furnished by the assessee were not available to the authorities below. We therefore by keeping in view the principles of natural justice, deem it appropriate to set aside this issue back to the file of the A.O. to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and by considering the new evidences now furnished by the assessee - Appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Addition made under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act for purchase of property without furnishing the source of investment.
2. Reopening of the case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
3. Consideration of additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1963.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The case involved the assessee appealing against the addition of ?26,59,670 to their total income under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee failed to provide the source of investment for the purchase of property amounting to ?77,32,000. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) observed that the sale deed indicated a total sale consideration of ?77,32,000 paid in cash to the seller, but the source of Stamp duty and Registration charges was not furnished. The A.O. concluded that the assessee had a share in the purchase of property and made the addition based on the evidence presented. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, stating that the explanations provided by the assessee were not sufficient to prove that no sale took place, as tangible evidence existed. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition, leading the assessee to appeal the decision.

2. The assessee submitted an application under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963, to admit additional evidence in the form of Girdavaris of the land, which they claimed had a significant bearing on the case. The additional evidence included copies of Girdavari of the agricultural land for specific periods and English translations. The assessee argued that these documents were crucial for the proper adjudication of the issue and were not available during the earlier proceedings due to circumstances beyond their control. The Tribunal considered the submissions, admitted the additional evidence, and remanded the issue back to the A.O. for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard and considering the new evidence presented.

3. The Tribunal's decision in ITA No. 36/Chd/2020 mirrored the findings in ITA No. 35/Chd/2020 as the facts were identical. Consequently, the appeals of the Assessees were allowed for statistical purposes, indicating a favorable outcome for the assessee in both cases. The judgment was pronounced in open court on 18/02/2021, concluding the legal proceedings in this matter.