2023 (10) TMI 378 - AT - Income Tax

Addition of on-money paid by the assessee for purchase of land in the name of his mother - contention of the assessee that no plot was purchased by him from MPD is inconsequential because the incriminating material indicated the name of the assessee to have paid the on-money against the purchase of land - HELD THAT - During the course of instant proceedings before the AO, which started with the receipt of information about the payment of on-money by the assessee, a request was made by the assessee for the supply of incriminating material from MPD. AO, vide notice u/s. 142(1) dt. 07-12-2018, offered the assessee to inspect the impounded material based on which the assessment was re-opened and requested the assessee to be present on 11-12-2018. Assessee chose to ignore this opportunity. The ld. DR has brought on record the service of such notice dt. 07-12-2018 on the assessee on the immediately next day, i.e. 08-12-2018. This shows that the assessee, despite requesting for the inspection of the incriminating material having his name with the amount of on-money, did not turn up to carry out the inspection of the impounded material when a specific opportunity was provided to him. This deciphers that the assessee had no explanation and was just trying to find lame excuses here and there to come out of the situation contrary to him. Page 12 of the impounded loose material, i.e. Annexure A4 had the name of the assessee at Sl.No. 21 giving the area, square feet rate, total amount, amount received till today, received amount before 27-04-2012 and amount due. Not only that even the dates of payments were also mentioned in the separate ledger maintained by MPD for this purpose. As absolutely clear that the assessee paid on-money to MPD for purchase of immovable property in the name of his mother. As such, we are satisfied that the authorities below were justified in making and confirming this addition. Appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the admission of additional grounds by the assessee and the confirmation of the addition of Rs. 43.00 lakh on account of on-money paid for the purchase of land in the name of the assessee's mother.

Admission of Additional Grounds:
The assessee raised two additional grounds challenging the order passed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal has jurisdiction to examine a question of law arising from the facts found by the authorities below, even if not raised earlier. However, for accepting additional grounds, the relevant facts on the legal issue must be available on record. In this case, the Tribunal found that the relevant facts for deciding the additional grounds were not available, as the assessee failed to substantiate non-compliance by the Revenue. Therefore, the Tribunal did not admit the additional grounds.

Confirmation of Addition of On-Money:
The main issue raised in the appeal was against the confirmation of the addition of Rs. 43.00 lakh on account of on-money paid by the assessee for the purchase of land in the name of his mother. During a survey, incriminating documents revealed that the assessee paid Rs. 43.00 lakh for the purchase of a plot in his mother's name. The Settlement Commission accepted the additional income declared by the seller, M/s. Mahalaxmi Properties and Developers (MPD), which included the on-money received from the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not provide a source for the payment of on-money and failed to inspect the impounded material despite a specific opportunity. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee paid on-money for the purchase of the property in his mother's name, and upheld the addition of Rs. 43.00 lakh.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, confirming the addition of Rs. 43.00 lakh on account of on-money paid by the assessee for the purchase of land in the name of his mother. The order was pronounced in the Open Court on 23rd June 2023.