9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... explanation or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory, the assessing officer can treat the value of the investments to be the income of the assessee of the financial year in which she/he has made the investments. In the case of the assessee, the nature and source of payment is satisfactorily explained by the assessee with necessary supporting evidences and the AO has also not questioned the genuineness of the loan given by Shri Arun Nair and whether the loan have been completely repaid or pending is of no relevance to invoking of provisions of 69 of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any fallacy in the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. DR contention that the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi /CIT(A) for the quantum of assessment passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 read with Section 144B for the A.Y. 2017-18. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the cases and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that addition of Rs. 1.39 Crore relating to issues of investments in the flat/immovable property is sustainable as per the remand report as against addition made u/s 69 of the Act as per order u/s 147 r.w.s 144B, being taxable under the relevant provision of sec 56(2), when the assessee has failed to prove the genuineness of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment order mentioned that the Assessee had purchased immovable property of Rs. 5,58,00,000/- and made an addition u/s 69 of the Act. Thereafter, the Ld Assessing Officer in his impugned order treated the motor vehicle purchased amounting to Rs. 48,75,292/- as unexplained expenditure and added the same u/s 69C of the Act. Lastly, Ld. Assessing officer taxed the cash credits made in the bank account amounting to Rs. 10,52,400/- u/s 68 of the Act in absence of any explanation from the assessee. 3. In response to the ex-parte order passed by AO, the assessee before the CIT (A) filed an application under 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 submitting additional evidence which could not furnished at the time of assessment proceedings. The CIT(A) c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of unexplained investment made towards purchase of immovable property was directed to be deleted and the addition of Rs 48,75,292 u/s 69C of the Act on account of unexplained expenditure incurred towards purchase of motor vehicle was also directed to be deleted. 5. Before us through grounds of appeal, AO took altogether new plea that the addition in the hands of assessee is sustainable U/s 56(2) of the Act. Ld. Senior DR submitted that since the assessee do not have the capacity to repay her entire contribution to Arun Patil hence, both amount paid for purchase of house and car should be treated as gift to her and is thus taxable U/s 56(2) of the Act. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the remand proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hus, for applying the provisions of section 69 of the Act, the AO should first come to a finding that the assessee has made investments and the same are not recorded in the books of account and thereafter he can call the assessee for an explanation from about the nature and source of the investments and in case he finds that the assessee is unable to furnish the explanation or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory, the assessing officer can treat the value of the investments to be the income of the assessee of the financial year in which she/he has made the investments. 8. In the case of the assessee, the nature and source of payment is satisfactorily explained by the assessee with necessary supporting evidences and the AO has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... invoice for other charges such as Insurance etc. Ledger of Auto Hanger showing that Rs. 40,21,000 was paid by the assessee for purchase of the Mercedes. Bank Statements highlighting the payment of Rs. 20,00,000 paid by the assessee. Bank statements of Yogesh Khairnar (brother of the assessee) evidencing payment of Rs. 10,00,055 paid by him on behalf of the assessee for purchase of the Mercedes on 22.02.2017, Bank Statements of Ranjana Mahesh Khairnar (mother of the assessee) showing payments of Rs. 10,00,055 paid by her on behalf of the assessee for purchase of the Mercedes on 22.02.2017. 11. Further the AO has also in the remand report admitted that the ultimate source of car purchase of Rs. 40,00,000 is from the bank account of Shri Arun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
