Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

AM ABOOBACKER Versus THE INCOME TAXOFFICER, WARD2 (2) ERNAKULAM

2015 (5) TMI 830 - KERALA HIGH COURT

Unexplained investment under Section 69 - Held that:- Tribunal was fully justified in upholding the conclusion of the lower authorities that the explanation of the appellant in so far as the investment in question was totally unsatisfactory and in such factual circumstances, we do not find any question of law arising consideration of this Court and, in our view, even the questions of law framed by the appellant also disclose only factual issues. - Decided against assesse. - ITA.No. 94 of 2015 - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Bench in ITA No.282/2014. By this order, the Tribunal has confirmed addition of unexplained investment of ₹ 69,00,000/- under Section 69 of the Income TaxAct. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant had purchased 35.137 cents of land in the Thrikkakkara North Village for a consideration of ₹ 60 lakhs. The property was purchased jointly with his brother. The appellant was called upon to explain and furnish the source of the said investment since the cash flow s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. It is aggrieved by this proceedings, this appeal is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act with the following questions of law for the consideration of this Court: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case: 1. the Appellate Tribunal is justified in dismissing the appeal against the impugned orders for the reasons stated by it in the impugned appellate orders regarding documents such as the revised cash flow statement supported by bank loan, proceeds from sale of l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g building, namely ₹ 24,00,000/- and approving the valuation done in other aspects without referring to approved valuer to arrive at correct valuation? 4. Is not the decision of the Appellate Tribunal erroneous insofar as the impugned assessment order was passed without following the principles of natural justice and without fairness inaction insofar as even personal hearing was not afforded to the appellant before finalising the assessment?" 4. Although various contentions impugning .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ining the source of the same. Since the source of the above investment was not satisfactorily explained, the Assessing Officer treated the amount of ₹ 69 lakhs as unexplained investment. Before the CIT(A), the assessee relied on revised cash flow statement. Firstly, to explain the source once again, the assessee has shown the loan from his brother, Shri.K.M.Kareem at ₹ 46,00,820/- in the revised cash flow statement which was only ₹ 1000/- in the original cash flow statement. Fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version