Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 509 - HC - Income TaxUnexplained addition to capital account - additional income surrendered by assessee - Assessee has failed to discharge the burden regarding the source from which the capital was introduced - ITAT concluded that the Assessee has duly explained the source of cash deposits in its bank account as well as the addition made to the capital account - since the surrender of income was made in the previous assessment year and tax was duly paid thereon, the said amount introduced in the accounts in the current assessment year would not be taxable. HELD THAT:- Appellant has not disputed the findings of the ITAT that in the remand report there was no adverse inference drawn by the AO with respect to the documentary evidence furnished by the assessee in respect of the unsecured loans. The learned counsel also does not dispute the finding of the CIT(A) that there was a surrender of income by the Assessee in the previous AY to the tune of Rs. 15.22 crores and tax was duly paid thereon. There is no challenge to the finding of the ITAT that in case of addition of Rs. 9.02 crores, the amounts were opening balances from the earlier years. ITAT has after perusing the evidences filed by the Assessee and the remand reports received from the AO, concluded that the addition against the Assessee cannot be sustained. The learned counsel for the Revenue has not been able to point out any error in the findings of fact by the learned ITAT. Admission of additional evidences - As in the facts of the present case, the additional evidences were admitted by the CIT (A) and remand reports were called for from the AO. There is nothing on record which evidences that the Revenue opposed the admission of additional evidence before the CIT (A). In fact, there was no cross objection filed by Revenue before the ITAT challenging the admission of the additional evidence by the CIT (A). The impugned order records that the AO perused the documents and submitted its remand reports which have been considered by the ITAT before deciding the matter. The learned counsel for the Appellant has not pointed out any error in the order of the ITAT in appreciating the remand reports. The objection to admission of additional evidence at this stage is belated and no ground for interference is made out. No substantial question of law.
|