9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and came to conclusion that the assessee has not established an amount therefore, he treated the said amount as unexplained investment. The assessee was not given the copy of the said statement of admission, nor he was given any opportunity for the purpose of rebutting the said statement. Mere admission of the third party cannot be a basis for making addition in the hands of the assessee without confronting the assessee about the incriminating material. M/s Vizag Profiles made a general statement that they have received some amount from the purchasers. Therefore, addition of unaccounted investment in the hands of the assessee cannot be sustained. Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A.No.10/Viz/2020 - - - Dated:- 16-11-2022 - SH ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee produced the books of account, bills / vouchers, other related information and also filed a letter stating that the assessee has purchased a flat from VPL Projects Pvt. Ltd. in the joint names of himself and his wife, Smt. Gowsiya Khan and furnished the sources and supporting documents towards purchase of the house property to the tune of Rs.47,20,000/- and for the remaining amount of Rs.17,80,000/-, no evidence was submitted. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee, as to why the difference amount of Rs.17,80,000/- should not be taxed on such unexplained investment. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee submitted a letter dated 18.03.2014 and stated as under : the assessee has invested a sum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds :- (1) CIT(Appeals) erred on facts and in law while upholding the validity of reassessment u/s 147. (2) CIT(Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.17,80,000/-. (3) Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing. 5. Ground No.1 and 3 are general in nature which do not require specific adjudication. 6. Ground No.3 relates to the addition of Rs.17,80,000/- made by the AO and sustained by the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR contended that the assessee has not paid anything more than the documented value of Rs.47,20,000/- for purchase of the impugned property. The AO completed the assessment by making an addition of Rs.17,80,000/- as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erty. The assessee furnished the sources and supporting documents towards the purchase of the house property to the tune of Rs.47,20,000/- , but has not submitted any evidence for the remaining amount of Rs.17,80,000/-. Hence, submitted that the assessment made by the AO is correct and the Ld.CIT(A) is justified in upholding the assessment made by the AO. Therefore, requested to uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. As seen from the material available on record, except the admission of the vendor, that the assessee had paid unaccounted cash for purchase of villa to the extent of Rs.30,74,000/- in Green City Project of Vizag Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
