Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 687 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained investments - Held that:- According to the assessee, house sites were acquired for consideration of ₹ 20 lakhs wherein the market value was ₹ 99,25,000 as per the records of Sub-Registrar’s Office. However, the A.O. has called upon the assessee to prove the source of investment of ₹ 20 lakhs only, which was claimed to have been paid, plus registration charges of ₹ 3,43,025. Thus the total expenditure under consideration was ₹ 23,43,025. The investment was claimed to be from withdrawals and agricultural income. As per the information furnished before the A.O. an amount of ₹ 15 lakhs was drawn from the partnership firm, besides agricultural income of ₹ 6,55,000. The Ld. CIT(A) has given detailed reasons while coming to the conclusion that this amount of ₹ 15 lakhs withdrawn from the partnership firm cannot be linked to the investments made in purchase of house sites and accordingly rejected the contention of the assessee. The availability of ₹ 6,55,000 having been accepted no further addition was made except confirming the addition of ₹ 15 lakhs under section 69 of the Act. No infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. With regard to source of agricultural income, it is not in dispute that the land is not in the name of the assessee and there is no proof that assessee earned agricultural income. Merely because the assessee’s husband owns some land, it cannot be assumed that the land was cultivated by his wife and she earned agricultural income. As rightly pointed out by the Ld. CIT(A) benefit of agricultural income cannot be given merely based on Tahsildar’s certificate, unless specific evidence is placed before the tax authorities. In the instant case, no such evidence could be placed. Therefore, did not find any infirmity in the order passed by Ld. CIT(A). - Decided against assessee.
|