2023 (7) TMI 174 - AT - Income Tax

Addition of deemed income u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) - difference in purchase price and stamps authority valuation - HELD THAT - Assessee has not made any explanation to AO when called upon to explain the difference in purchase price and stamps authority valuation. Even the assessee has not disputed the valuation done by stamps authority on any ground. Secondly, during first-appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has simply mentioned the verdict of section 50C and made a simple rather vague claim that the valuation done by Stamp Authorities is very high. There is no iota of explanation or substantiation made by assessee as to why it is very high. Therefore, the claim of assessee is for the sake of claim only. Addition made by lower-authorities is mandated by section 56(2)(vii)(b) and in absence of a valid explanation by assessee, the same has to be made, there is no escape route. It is further observed that the assessee is not representing his case before us despite several opportunities. Therefore also, in absence of any assistance coming from assessee, we do not find any valid reason to interfere with the findings of lower authorities. Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Appeal against order of Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) based on assessment-order passed by Income Tax Officer for Assessment Year 2014-15.
2. Addition of Rs. 30,69,525/- as deemed income of the assessee under section 56(2)(vii)(b) challenged by the assessee.
3. Ex-parte decision due to non-appearance of the assessee during the appeal hearing.

Summary:
Issue 1: The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) based on the assessment-order passed by the Income Tax Officer for Assessment Year 2014-15.

Issue 2: The addition of Rs. 30,69,525/- as deemed income of the assessee under section 56(2)(vii)(b) was challenged by the assessee. The Income Tax Officer found a difference in the valuation of an immovable property jointly purchased by the assessee and his wife, compared to the valuation by the Stamps Authority. The assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for this difference, leading to the addition of the said amount as income from other sources. The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) upheld this addition, noting that the assessee's objections were unsubstantiated and raised merely for the sake of it.

Issue 3: The assessee did not appear during the appeal hearing despite multiple opportunities and notices sent. The hearing proceeded ex-parte, with the Departmental Representative representing the Revenue. The Tribunal considered the submissions and orders of the lower authorities, noting the lack of valid explanations from the assessee. As a result, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the lower authorities and dismissed the appeal, maintaining the impugned addition of Rs. 30,69,525/- as deemed income of the assessee under section 56(2)(vii)(b).