TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- each and advanced these for purchase of land to the assessee. I estimate the balance undisclosed income at Rs. 8,00,000/-. Accordingly, I estimate the explained money of these two cash credits namely Shri P. Sakthivel and Shri M. Muthukumar of Rs. 8,00,000/- and balance Rs. 8,00,000/- to be treated as unexplained. Appeal filed by the assessee is partly-allowed. - ITA No.: 985/CHNY/2022 - - - Dated:- 7-3-2023 - SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT For the Appellant : Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri S. Chandrasekaran, JCIT ORDER This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Appeal No. CIT(A), Coimbatore 2/101140/2017-18 dated 18.08.2022. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 2(2), Coimbatore for the assessment year 2015-16 u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ) vide order dated 28.12.2017. 2. At the outset it is noticed that this appeal is barred by limitation by 35 days. The impugned appellate order of CIT(A) was received by assessee on 13.08. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of cash book for the financial year 2014-15 and stated that the assessee had received advance to the tune of Rs. 24,00,000/- from three persons i.e., Rs. 8,00,000/- from each of Shri P. Karthikeyan, Shri P. Sakthivel and Shri M. Muthukar. The assessee explained that these three persons has entered into agreement on 11.09.2014 with the assessee for purchase of assessee s agricultural land at Punjaikilambadi Village at Erode District. The assessee claimed before the AO that the source of cash deposit of Rs. 24,00,000/- is out of advance received from these three persons. The AO noted that the sale agreement dated 11.09.2014 clearly reveals tht the document / agreement was not registered and it is valid only for 11 months from 11.09.2014 to 11.08.2015. The assessee before AO admitted that till date, the assessee is holding advance and no interest was paid. Hence, the AO required the assessee to produce these parties and these parties deposed before the AO admitting advancing the amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- each. The AO examined these parties on 19.12.2017 during the course of assessment proceedings and he narrated the gist of the statement recorded, which reads as under:- (i) P. Kar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t for the amount advanced nor intended to go against Sri V S Shanmugasundaram for the delay in sale. (iii) M. Muthukumar: Said to be owner of 3.2 acres of land. He is deriving an average income per year around Rs. 1.5 lakhs from out of 10 acres of family agricultural land, inclusive of the land holdings in his name. He is staying with his father, wife and two children who are studying. His average annual expenses per annum is around Rs. 1 lakhs, including education of children fee of Rs. 30,000/p.a., LIC policy of Rs.18,000/p.a, maintenance and fuel expenses of alto car, and house hold expenses (For five members of his family) totaling to Rs. 42,000/ p.a. and car insurance of Rs. 2,100/p.a. etc. He is said to be having an account with credit society account. Karumnandampalayam and also having an SB account in wife's name with minimum balance. He stated that out of proceeds of papaya amounting to Rs. 6 lakh, savings Rs. 1 lakh and loan amounting to Rs. 1 lakh, he had advanced, for purchase of land, to Sri VS Shanmugasundaran and neither received any interest nor preferred to go against him legally during the last three years. He also planned to do agricultural activities afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and deriving income to the tune of Rs. 4 to 5 lakhs per annum. Similarly, Shri M. Muthukumar, is owner of 3.2 acres of land and arriving an average income per year around Rs. 1.5 lakhs and also owns 10 acres of family agricultural land which includes the land owning in his name of 3.2 acres. These three persons admittedly have accepted having advanced a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- for purchase of agricultural land in lieu of purchase agreement dated 11.09.2014. All the three cash creditors admitted that still the advance is pending and sale has not become finalized. But the assessee has also not backed out from this agreement with these three persons and he is ready to get this sale deed done for this agricultural land. 6.1 When these facts were confronted to ld. Senior DR, he only relied on the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A) and stated that this is a make belief story just to explain the source of cash deposit of Rs. 24,00,000/-. According to ld. Senior DR, the alleged agreement which is unregistered was cancelled and it was valid only for 11 months from the period 11.09.2014 to 11.08.2015. Hence, he asked the Bench to confirm the orders of the lower authorities and ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
