Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 423 - AT - Income TaxIssues Involved: The judgment involves twin assessees' appeals for the assessment year 2016-2017 against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi's orders, dealing with proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeals also include stay applications seeking to restrain the department from recovering outstanding demands. Issue 1: Sec.69C Addition in Case of Mrs. Moureen Camara The assessees challenged the addition made under sec.69C r.w.s.115BBE for unexplained import expenditure in the case of Mrs. Moureen Camara. The appeals raised substantive grounds questioning the lower authorities' actions and validity of the proceedings u/s. 148/147 and transfer of jurisdiction u/sec.127 r.w.s.129 of the Act. However, these specific arguments were not pursued during the hearing. Issue 2: Unexplained Expenditure under Sec.69C in Mr. Melwyn Camara's Case In Mr. Melwyn Camara's appeal, the Assessing Officer made an addition towards unexplained expenditure under sec.69C for purchases amounting to Rs. 89,79,665. The NFAC affirmed this action, emphasizing the lack of documentation and evidence to support the non-payment claim by the assessee. The customs duty paid was also a crucial factor in the decision. Decision and Rationale: After considering the arguments from both sides, the tribunal found no merit in the assessees' cases. It was noted that the import expenditure was not recorded in the books of account, and the explanation provided failed to establish a credible basis for the non-payment claim. The tribunal highlighted the lack of documentation and past business relations to support the assessee's position. The tribunal also emphasized the payment of customs duty and the failure to meet the test of human probabilities based on relevant legal precedents. The tribunal affirmed the lower authorities' actions in deleting the impugned additions, stating that the assessees did not fulfill their duty to prove relevant facts. The alternative prayer for relief regarding the custom duty component was also rejected, as the NFAC had already granted relief in lower appellate proceedings, and sec.69C proviso barred such an addition. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, and the stay applications were rejected. The tribunal's order was pronounced in open court on 07.06.2024.
|