Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 179 - ITAT DELHIAddition u/s 69 of the Act - Increase of amount of bank account – Deposit of tuition fee – Held that:- The assessee is a teacher has been receiving monthly salary from the Sanskriti School in all the relevant assessment years - the assessee has been filing returns and has been consistently claiming in the said return certain income as her tuition fee income for the assessment years - the returns were filed by the assessee regularly every year u/s 139(1) and the veracity of the claim of the assessee in respect to her certain income as tuition fee income has not been questioned in any of the AY’s – the addition of the tuition income, as income from undisclosed source is not permissible in the eyes of law particularly even in the year, sum has been declared and assessed as tuition income - There is no material to show that ₹ 3,41,000/- is from a source other than the tuition income – the addition made by the AO and later on confirmed by the CIT(A) in respect of tuition fee income, which the assessee has been consistently claiming cannot be said to be her income from undisclosed source; and her claim in the regular return filed in respect to tuition income being accepted and taxed by the predecessor AO cannot be discarded in the absence of any specific incriminating materials to suggest otherwise – Decided in favour of Assessee. Addition u/s 69B of the Act – Payment made to M/s Shah Construction out of her savings bank account with HDFC bank – Held that:- The reasoning of the CIT(A) cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the assessee was in receipt of tuition income which was regularly reflected by her in her duly returned income filed u/s 139(1); and regularly brought to tax and has been as a fact taxed in the hands of the assessee; and moreover we find that the assessee/ appellant had sufficient disclosed income in her saving banks accounts to finance the construction - the amount of ₹ 3,90,000/- has been paid by cheque from HDFC Bank account on 21st December 2005; and M/s. Shah Construction has confirmed that it has received ₹ 3,90,000/- from assessee – thus, the addition is liable to be set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee. Addition u/s 69C of the Act – Held that:- The assessee has made an expenditure of ₹ 3.1,989/- for the AY - The tuition income of the assessee in regular return is ₹ 3,45,000 - The amount incurred for construction has been paid by the appellant by cheque for ₹ 3,90,000/- to Ms. Shah Construction and it has been confirmed by the receipt - the AO did not take into consideration, the fact of payment of ₹ 3,90,000/- to M/s. Shah Construction vide cheque No. 400185 dated 21st December, 2005 for the construction at Noida and though the AO has accepted that an amount was withdrawn by the assessee from the bank for the relevant AY - the AO has erroneously stated that ₹ 3,90,000/- was invested in the construction of house at Noida from cash in hand, whereas the assessee has made the said transaction through cheque bearing no. 400185 dated 21st December 2005 – thus, the addition sustained by the CIT(A) is to be set aside – Decided in favour of Assessee. Addition of interest income – Held that:- The assessee has shown income from other sources which include interest on FDR and as interest on saving bank - the total interest income as per the computation and also as per the capital account is shown – the AO has worked out the interest income as such there is a difference of ₹ 812 – thus, the deletion of addition of ₹ 10,200/- and add only ₹ 812/- is directed to the income of the assessee - Decided in favour of Assessee.
|