Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 732 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 69B - unaccounted investment of ₹ 57,85,000/- in purchase of a land measuring 5160 meter situated at survey no. 731 Makarba - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The basis condition for applying under section 69B is that it should be found that the assessee has made investment or the assessee found to be owner of the money, bullion and jewellery. In the present case, assessee was found to have made investment for purchase of plots. The next question is whether the assessee has made investment exceeding the amount recorded in the books. This is a crucial question, which demonstrates factual position. It is to be proved with the help of evidence available on record. According to the assesee, he was made investment in purchase of plot equivalent to the one disclosed in the sale deed. It is the Assessing Officer who is disputing and harbouring a belief that the assessee has made investments, over and above, the amount so disclosed in the sale deed. His belief is based on the basis of loan liability discharged by the vendor. This type of evidence possessed by the Assessing Officer is of not such a nature, which empowers him to invoke section 69B of the Act. Assessee failed to make reference of any evidence which demonstrate that assessee has made unexplained investment. The assumption of the Assessing Officer is based on the fact that vendors have discharged their loan liability meaning thereby they would have not sold the property below the liability they have discharged. To our mind, this is a far fetched inference. The Ld. First Appellate Authority has analyzed the bank statement and inferred that loan taken by the vendors was of ₹ 205 lacs, they have mortgaged other properties also. They have paid other amounts also. there is no direct co-relation between the discharge of loan liability vis-à-vis sale of this plot. The only connection between the bank and this property was that it was under mortgage. Vendors have got it released from the bank and it is sold to the assessee. No addition against higher capital gain has been made in the hands of the vendors. It is for the vendors to explain the source of what amount which they have discharged towards their loan liability. It cannot be presumed that it must be taken from the assessee in cash over and above the amounts stated in the sale deed. In our opinion, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has appreciated the facts and circumstances in right perspective. There is no evidence with the Assessing Officer to suggest that assessee has made unexplained investment in the purchase of the property - Decided in favour of assessee.
|