Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Home
Issues involved: Appeal by Revenue and Cross Objection by Assessee regarding addition of unexplained investment on construction/ renovation of 1st floor of House u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Summary: 1. Assessee's Cross Objection: The assessee withdrew the cross objection filed, which was permitted by the tribunal, leading to the dismissal of the cross objection. 2. Revenue's Appeal Grounds: The Revenue appealed against the deletion of the addition of Rs. 15,12,750 made by the Assessing Officer. The grounds included the loan from LIC Housing Finance for construction, valuation report confirmation, and the onus on the assessee to verify facts. 3. Facts of the Case: The assessee declared income and purchased land, with a loan from LIC Housing Finance. The AO noted loan utilization for construction and renovation, leading to the addition u/s 69C. The assessee's explanation was deemed insufficient. 4. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) Decision: The Commissioner considered various factors, including lack of cross-examination, disbelieved evidence, and reports indicating construction completion in earlier years. The addition was deleted based on these discrepancies. 5. Tribunal's Decision: The tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, noting the lack of conclusive proof of construction in the current year, reliance on doubtful statements, and absence of evidence from the Assessing Officer. The Revenue's appeal and assessee's cross objection were dismissed. In conclusion, the tribunal affirmed the decision of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) regarding the addition of unexplained investment on construction/renovation of the house property, highlighting the importance of conclusive evidence and proper verification in such cases.
|