GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (7) TMI 987 - ITAT HYDERABAD

2015 (7) TMI 987 - ITAT HYDERABAD - TMI - Unexplained investment - assessee has taken a new stand at the time of hearing by stating that the amounts of investment made by the assessee during the years under consideration and treated as unexplained by the A.O. were actually sourced from the funds available with assessee’s HUF - Held that:- Find merit in the arguments of the learned D.R. that the new stand taken by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee by attempting to explain the source of investments .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

over, the documents filed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee in support of the new stand taken by him constitute additional evidence and there is no application filed by him seeking admission thereof as required by Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1963. Furthermore, as rightly contended by the Ld. DR, these documents filed by the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal is not a reliable evidence inasmuch as the computation of total income of the HUF is filed for A.Y. 2011-2012 and in the absence .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

generally required to be utilized for making corresponding purchases. A copy of the bank account showing some withdrawals alone therefore cannot establish the availability of funds with the HUF at the relevant time unless it is supported by a balance sheet of the HUF. Therefore decline to entertain the new stand taken on behalf of the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal and since the same, in any case, is not acceptable even on merit on the basis of documents filed by the Ld. Counse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nst two separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-I, Guntur dated 16th February, 2015 for A.Ys. 2007-2008 and 2008- 2009 involve similar issues and the same therefore have been heard together and are being disposed of by single consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who is engaged in the business of fire wood. A search and seizure action under section 132 was conducted on 15.09.2008 in the cases belonging to Goud group. During the course of 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

y the A.O., the assessee had purchased one plot of land at Annojiguda admeasuring 400 sq. yards for an amount of ₹ 4,80,000. In the balance sheet filed by the assessee, the investment in the property however was shown by the assessee at ₹ 2,00,000 only. Since this difference of ₹ 2,80,000 was not satisfactorily explained by the assessee, the sum of ₹ 2,80,000 was added by the A.O. to the total income of the assessee for the A.Y. 2007-2008 in the assessment completed under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nvestment of ₹ 5,00,000 made by the assessee in payment of advance against property amounting to ₹ 5,00,000 as unexplained and added the said amount to the total income of the assessee for A.Y. 2008-2009. 2.2. The assessee was also found to have made investment in purchase of a open plot admesuring 634 sq. yards at Survey No. 1 and 2 Maji (Part) along with his brother for a total consideration of ₹ 6,35,000. In this regard, his share of investment to the tune of ₹ 3,47,17 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said year was filed by the assessee only in response to the notice issued under section 153C. He therefore, treated the entire investment of ₹ 5,05,620 made by the assessee in this property as unexplained and added the said amount to the total income of the assessee. Accordingly, in the assessment completed under section 143(3) read with section 153C vide order dated 29th December, 2010, the total income of the assessee was determined by the A.O. at ₹ 11,31,577 after making two addi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ings before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee however could not offer any satisfactory explanation as regards the source of investment of ₹ 2.80 lakhs made in A.Y. 2007-2008 and the source of investment of ₹ 5 lakhs made in A.Y. 2008-2009. The Ld. CIT(A) therefore confirmed both the additions made by the A.O. on these counts. As regards the remaining addition of ₹ 5,05,620 made by the A.O. in A.Y. 2008-2009, the Ld. CIT(A) found that the said investment to the extent of ₹ 3,47 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed these appeals before the Tribunal. 4. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material on record. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has taken a new stand at the time of hearing before me by stating that the amounts of investment made by the assessee during the years under consideration and treated as unexplained by the A.O. were actually sourced from the funds available with assessee s HUF. He has submitted that the said HUF is engaged in the business of trad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal. He has contended that this stand was not taken by the assessee either before the A.O. or before the Ld. CIT(A) and in the absence of any satisfactory explanation offered by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee for failing to do so, the new stand taken by the assessee at this stage should not be entertained. He has also pointed out that the documents now being filed by the assessee do not constitute reliable evidence as the computation of total i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

record, I find merit in the arguments of the learned D.R. that the new stand taken by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee by attempting to explain the source of investments made by the assessee in his individual capacity as the funds available with the HUF cannot be entertained at this stage. First of all, this explanation was not offered by the assessee either before the A.O. or before the Ld. CIT(A) and in the absence of any reasons given by Ld. Counsel for the assessee to show what prevented th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

7-7-2017 Income Tax

More Circulars



|| 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