Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (12) TMI 245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he section is not applicable without giving any reason in the grounds of appeal is not tenable. Additional ground of appeal stating that CBDT instructions forbid the Ld. AO from exceeding the purview of reasons mentioned in the CASS to make any addition - This additional ground of appeal is entertained and adjudicated against the appellant because the Ld. DR has shown in paragraph 2 of the assessment order that one of the scrutiny reason is whether investment and income in property is properly disclosed and hence the appellant cannot dispute the issue on this technical ground. In our considered view also, the issue is covered under CASS, and hence the Ld. AO is empowered to adjudicate this issue in limited scrutiny and the reliance placed b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... TAT, High Court and Supreme Court as on this date. The Ld. DR relied on grounds of appeal. 2. After hearing both sides and perusing the CBDT s Circular, it is decided that the contention of Ld. AR of the appellant is correct and the Department appeal is dismissed as not maintainable due to monetary limits. C.O. 12/Mum/2024 3. The above cross objection was filed by the appellant for A.Y. 2016-17 and the sole ground taken is the addition of Rs. 23,17,000/- made to total income under section 56(2) is incorrect and bad in law . This issue was dealt with by learned Assessing Officer (Ld. AO for short) in paragraph 5 of the assessment order and para 5.2, page 6 of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Act (Appeals) [the Ld. CIT(A) for short] ord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lied on the decision of PCIT Vs. Rakesh Kumar 152 taxman.com 398 (P H). In response to this argument, Ld. DR has said the issue of addition is covered in the limited scrutiny, paragraph 2 of the assessment order under the head Investment and Income relating to property are duly disclosed i.e. Ld. AO had to scrutinize the investment in the house and income earned thereon are properly disclosed as per law. 8. Heard both sides and it is decided that section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act is applicable in the circumstances of this case and hence the addition is upheld for the following reasons :- a) The difference in purchase price of flat shown in the documents is more than the market value exceeding Rs. 50,000/- i.e. the difference between Rs. 3,53 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dicate this issue in limited scrutiny and the reliance placed by Ld. AR of the appellant on CBDT Instruction No. 20/2015 dated 29.12.2015 is not applicable in the present case. Accordingly, the case relied on by Ld. AR of the appellant in PCIT Vs. Rakesh Kumar (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case. It is pertinent to note that the Ld. AO has added judiciously 50% of excess money i.e., Rs. 23,17,100/- (50% share of Rs. 46,34,000) only here as the appellant holds 50% share and other 50% of share was held by the spouse. The Ld. AR of the appellant was asked whether similar addition was made in the spouse s case for which it was stated that his case was completed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act and no addition was made. Secondly, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates