Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1711 - ITAT DELHIAddition u/s 68 - evidences about the receipt of the cash and repayment of the cash despite those persons having proper bank account - Held that:- ‘Bayana Slip’ was not produced. Further, the earlier letters written to the Assessing Officer as claimed by the assessee were also not found on the record by the ld CIT (A). In another person’s case, the same reasons were found which were explained by the assessee with respect to the third person who is son of the assessee also did not remember any reference of cash receipt from the assessee. In absence of any such evidences about the receipt of the cash and repayment of the cash despite those persons having proper bank account and absence of any purchase of land by the assessee, whole explanation of the assessee lacks credibility. With respect to the agricultural income, the reasons given by the CIT (A) are sound. Merely possession of land does not entitle assessee to claim any amount of income as agricultural income. The agricultural income is also required to be demonstrated by proper evidences which assessee has failed to show. No infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition u/s 68 Addition u/s 69B - Held that:- Most of the properties are merely backed by agreement to sell and therefore there cannot be any document price for sale. However, the argument of the assessee with respect to property which were purchased in the auction from the debt recovery tribunal the valuation of same cannot be different from the value shown by the assessee. However, such facts were not produced by the assessee before the assessing officer. In view of this to the extent of the valuation of property purchased by the assessee in auction cannot have different market value. The addition made by AO for that property is ₹ 5, 15,000/- as assessee has shown the purchase consideration of ₹ 14.85 Lacs whereas the assessing officer has valued at ₹ 20 lakhs cannot be sustained. Therefore we direct AO to delete the addition of ₹ 5, 15, 000/– out of the total addition of ₹ 2 6, 15, 000. For the balance addition of ₹ 21 Lacs, We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer is confirmed to the extent of ₹ 21 lakhs only.
|