Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1032 - AT - Income TaxAddition on account of alleged short-term capital gain - AO called upon assessee as to why stamp value adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority should not be applied - DR contended that the AO was justified in computing the capital gain as transfer of property was completed and all conditions for taxability of STCG was satisfied - HELD THAT:- From the finding of Ld.CIT(A), it is clear that value assessed by the DVO was not accepted on account of the fact that DVO had adopted the sale instance of Narela which could not be applied to the sale instance at Wazirpur for assessing the fair market value of the property. The assessee has not brought any material rebutting the finding of Ld.CIT(A) on record. The assessee chose not to appear before the Tribunal despite various opportunities were provided to him. It is incumbent upon the assessee to prove true and correct fair market value of the property. Merely, stating that there was dispute would not be sufficient to accept the value declared by the assessee. The assessee has not furnished any Settlement Deed or award by the Arbitral Award regarding sale consideration of property. Therefore, in the absence of the relevant evidences, the finding of the authorities below remained unrebutted. Thus, Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is dismissed. Unexplained unsecured loan - no confirmation and copy of income tax return was filed - HELD THAT:- We find that the AO had noticed that various discrepancies in respect of claim of unsecured loans received from the various parties by the assessee. Even before this Tribunal, the assessee has grossly failed to substantiate his claim and negligently did not appear before the Tribunal despite having given various opportunities. The assessee was required to prove identity of creditors, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of creditors. The assessee grossly failed to do so. Therefore, in the absence of the supporting evidences regarding claim of unsecured loans, we do not see any infirmity in the finding of authorities below. Thus, Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is dismissed.
|