Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 270 - AT - Income TaxReceipt of loans from various persons Creditworthiness of persons not established Held that:- Smt. P. Vinodha is mother-in-law of the assessee who filed an affidavit and submitted that she has funds out of retirement, death-cum-retirement benefit of her husband plus income from agricultural land of about ac.6.32 gts - Assessee being son-in-law, she advanced interest free loan and confirmed the amounts - Assessee being a shareholder in the property also, it were accepted by the CIT(A) as a source the order of the CIT(A) is upheld Decided against Revenue. Sale of agricultural land Amount not effected in bank a/c Held that:- Just because it was not affected to the bank account, it does not mean that assessee did not have a source of funds - CIT(A) has noted that assessee has sold ac.2.12 gts situated at Maheswaram Mandal - copy of the pattadar passbook as noted by the revenue authorities were also filed there was no reason in not giving credit to the amount, just because the transaction has not routed through the bank account - AO has verified the cash deposits and bank account and the assessee also explained to AO the source of deposit out of sale proceeds received in cash Decided against Revenue. Advance receipt on sale of land No evidence adduced Held that:- There was no reason not to give credit to the amount - Assessee has shown the amount in the Balance Sheet prepared as advance received and furnished necessary evidence in the form of an agreement of sale before the CIT(A) with necessary Annexures vide E & F which was also sent to the AO in the remand - If AO chose to ignore and gives report to the CIT(A) that all the information was available with the AO at the time of assessment, the CIT(A) cannot be faulted for entertaining the evidence and giving a finding - the assessee has submitted necessary evidences in support of contention that it has received advance by virtue of the agreement of sale entered with a company, there was no reason to differ from the finding of CIT(A) Decided against Revenue.
|