TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2007 cannot be brought tax u/s 69 in the relevant assessment year, namely, A.Y. 2008-2009. For this reason alone, the A.O. was not justified in law in making an addition by invoking the provisions of section 69 of the I.T.Act. The advance paid by the assessee to Shri Narayana Reddy during the assessment year 2006-2007 is stated to be out of sale proceeds of 1 Acre 30 guntas of land belonging to the assessee and her son. Since it is clear that the amount has been advanced for purchase of land in assessment year 2006- 2007, addition u/s 69 of the I.T.Act amounting to ₹ 17,10,000 cannot be made for the relevant assessment year, viz., 2008- 2009. It is ordered accordingly. Unexplained investment u/s 69 - HELD THAT:- As assessee h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not given any details with regard to the cash deposits of ₹ 50,000 on 07.04.2007, as confirm this addition. - ITA No. 193/Bang/2020 - - - Dated:- 2-3-2021 - Shri George George K, Judicial Member Appellant by : Sri.Ravishankar S.V., Advocate Respondent by : Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel ORDER This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A) s order dated 14.11.2019. The relevant assessment year is 2008-2009. 2. There is a delay of 5 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay. I have perused the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay and I am of the view that there is sufficient cause in filing this appeal belated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .the assessee is a Senior Citizen and solely dependent on the interest received by her from Fixed deposit in the Karnataka Bank Ltd., She does not have any dependents and she is looked after by Ashram inmates in Swamy Vivekananda Ashram, Hoody Village, Bangalore. By the above words the assessee s representative appear to impress on the assessing officer to show mercy on the assessee by his above explanation, without explaining the following basic questions. 1. How the amount of ₹ 17,10,000/- was earned by the assessee? 2. When this amount was earned by the assessee? 3. How the amount has come to the credit of the assessee? 4. What is the agreement between the assessee and Shri H.T.Narayana Reddy to thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the written submissions filed before the CIT(A), the return of income for assessment year 2008-2009, copy of sale deed dated 25.06.2003, copy of sale deed dated 25.08.2004, return of income and statement of computation of income for assessment years 2005-2006, 2006- 2007 and 2007-2008, Affidavit filed by Shri H.T.Narayana Reddy, etc. The learned AR reiterated the submissions made before the Income Tax Authorities. 4.3 The learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, strongly supported the assessment order and the CIT(A) s findings. 4.4 I have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. From the plain reading of section 69 of the I.T.Act, it is clear that investments which are made in the financial year immediately p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hoodi Village, Mahadevapura Post, Bangalore 560 048, do hereby solemnly affirm and state under oath as follows: 01. I state that I am competent to swear to this affidavit. 02. I state that I had received a sum of ₹ 17,10,000/- in cash during the financial year 2005-2006 from Smt.Anasuya Basi Reddy for purchasing a piece of land in her name. 03. I further state that due to lack of interest on part of Smt.Anasuya Basi Reddy to purchase land and subsequent request from them to return the aforesaid land advance, I have repaid part of the aforesaid advance amounting to ₹ 4,00,000/- in cash during the Financial year 2007-2008, 04. I further undertake to state that the remaining balance of ₹ 13,10,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on the AIR information, had added a sum of ₹ 5 lakh as unexplained investments in mutual funds and bank deposits. From the facts in para 4.4.1 (supra), it is clear that the assessee had received back a sum of ₹ 4 lakh being part of advance amount paid to Shri Narayana Reddy. This amount of ₹ 4 lakh received from Shri Narayana Reddy was invested in mutual funds. With regard to the bank deposit of ₹ 1 lakh, the Assessing Officer has erroneously came to the conclusion that the assessee has made bank deposit of ₹ 1 lakh. The A.O. himself in paragraph 5 of the impugned assessment order had found that on verification of assessee s bank account, there was no such bank deposit on 12.11.2007 of ₹ 1 lakh. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
