Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 187 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained investment in purchase land - on-money payment - Addition relying on the statement of some of the sellers of land to the assessee - HELD THAT:- Both the lower authorities namely, the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the AO have failed to bring anything on record to prove conclusively, that the allegation of payment of on-money is in consonance with circle rate or with valuation of the land by Stamp Duty Authority. The addition is also not based on valuation of land by any registered valuer. The addition is also not based on any report of Valuation Officer. The lower authorities have also failed to bring any material on record to show that the addition is justified on the basis of fair market value of the land.- no material to even indicate that the true value of land commanded a figure higher than what is reported by the assessee. - Additions deleted. Addition being cash deposited in bank account of the lender - HELD THAT:- From perusal of records, we find that the assessee has conclusively proved that the assessee took loan from Mr. Rahul Kalsi, the loan creditor, for the purpose of purchasing the aforesaid piece of land and has explained the source of funds for purchase of the aforesaid piece of land, the loan creditor has also submitted Loan Confirmation Certificate, which is part of record. From the perusal of record we find that the assessee has proved the identity of the loan creditor, the capacity of the loan creditor and the genuineness of the loan transaction. - Moreover, there is no provision under law prohibiting the loan creditor to make direct payment to the seller of land. - Additions deleted. Addition on account of low drawings for household expenses - HELD THAT:- This addition is based on estimated monthly household expenses of ₹ 30,000/- per month. On perusal of records, and having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that this estimate made by AO cannot be said to be excessive, unreasonable or high pitched. Therefore, this addition made by the AO, and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby confirmed.
|