9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HUF had no independent source of income and moreover, the said factual aspect was admitted by the assessee before the Assessing Officer, as recorded by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal. The assessee declaring his income by filing a revised income and offering to tax the amount utilized for the purpose of construction cannot be permitted to contend that the amount in the joint names of two members of the HUF cannot be considered to be the income of the HUF -we do not find any merit in considering the issues which are purely fact related, in appeal proceedings under Section 260A - we answer the substantial questions of law in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. - I.T.A.No.10/2014 - - - Dated:- 14-9-2021 - HON BLE MRS.JUS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mar Saboo (HUF) v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 340 ITR 382 on the facts and circumstances in this case? 3. The assessee, a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF, for short) represented by its kartha, Shri H.N. Subba Rama Gupta, is the proprietor of Gupta Enterprises, Hassan, which derives income from business as well as from house properties. The assessee had furnished his return of income for the assessment year in question declaring a total income of ₹ 1,97,500/- on 20.02.2008 which was subsequently revised on 31.03.2010 admitting a total income of ₹ 9,22,490/-. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... return declaring unexplained investment of ₹ 8,00,000/-. No defence about the source of income taken before the CIT (Appeals) was raised before the Assessing Officer pursuant to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. Moreover, the issues now raised being pure questions of fact, the same cannot be considered as substantial questions of law in adjudicating the appeal filed under Section 260A of the Act. 7. We have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 8. The assessee having filed the revised return declaring unexplained investment of ₹ 8,00,000/-, made an effort to explain the source of income before the CIT (Appeals) contending that the amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
