9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for making investments/advances in the relevant year. Thus, the creditworthiness of Smt. Sudha Goyal does not remain questionable thereafter. Hence, we reversed the finding of the CIT(A) in this regard and delete the addition Disallowance of interest u/s 24 - Appellant/ assessee is required to make investment to the extent of his share. Thus, we hereby direct the AO to verify from the record that whether the investment made by the assessee to the extent of his share from the borrowed fund on interest. The initial investment has to be treated as assessee's share. In case, the bank account of the assessee after taking borrowed fund is found utilized for the acquiring the property to the extent of initial investment (as any prudent man wil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oyal 50% Rs.55,91,977/- Rs.27,21,250/- 3 Shri Anuj Goyal 5% Rs.6,21,331/- Nil 3.1 The assessee has made investment of Rs. 97,05,366/- in the said property in the relevant year as against the required investment, as per his share, of Rs. 53,19,563/-. During the course of assessment, the assessee has admitted the source of investment in the said property as under: Source of Funds Amount (Rs.) Loan from NRI Mr. Anuj Goyal &Ms. Ruchi Goyal (brother & sister) 75,23,201 Gift from NRI Ms. Ruchi Goyal (Sister) 7,72,000/- Transfer from Ms. Sudha Goyal (Mother) 33,92,975/- Transfer from Mr. Vinod Goyal (Father) 8,48,900/- Total Investment 1,25,37,076/- 3.2 The Assessing Officer (hereinafter, the 'AO'), holding the credit worth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that Smt. Sudha Goyal was also one of the co- owners of the said property and if any investments made in the said property directly or indirectly found unexplained, then the same should have been taxed in her hands and not in the case of the appellant/assessee. Accordingly, the Ld. AR, by submitting that the creditworthiness of Smt. Sudha Goyal being not doubtful at present in view of the above facts, requested for consequential relief on this score. In respect of second issue i.e. interest payment; the Ld. AR submitted that the actual payment of interest was not a precondition for allowability of interest under section 24 of the Act. Thus, he requested for consequential relief on this score too. 5. Per contra, the Ld. Senior Departmenta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gued that the claim of interest under section 24 of the Act sourced from the borrowed fund had been rightly held as unjustified. 6. We have heard both the parties at length and have perused the material available on the record. We find force in the argument of the Ld. AR that the Revenue was required to assess the unexplained investments made directly or indirectly in the said property in the hands of the respective co-owners if their creditworthiness was doubtful. We are of the considered view that the ACIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Ghaziabad, by accepting the version of Smt. Sudha Goyal in reopened assessment proceedings has held that she has the creditworthiness for making investments/advances in the relevant year. Thus, the creditworthiness of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
