SINGIREDDY VIJAYALAXMI, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 620/HYD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 November 2021AY 2007-085 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had provided evidence for the sale of the property and the receipt of sale proceeds, including cash and cheque payments. The lower authorities failed to properly consider this evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed to have received Rs. 10.50 lakhs from the sale of a house property in 2003, with Rs. 3.20 lakhs in cash and the rest via cheques. These cheques were deposited into a newly opened bank account. The lower authorities made an addition of Rs. 9.90 lakhs as unexplained investment.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 9.90 lakhs as unexplained investment was justified when the assessee provided evidence of sale of property and receipt of sale proceeds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for AY.2007-08 arises from the CIT(A)-11, Hyderabad’s order dated 18-10-2016 passed in case No.0696 / ACIT CC-1(3) / CIT(A)-11 / 10-11, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) r.w.s.153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in making un-explained investment addition of Rs.9.90 lakhs, learned representative takes us to the CIT(A)’s detailed discussion treating as under:

:- 2 -:

“7. The case was posted for a hearing on 30/06/2016 but none appeared. The assessee was therefore afforded another opportunity vide this office letter dated 01/07/2016 served on the Ld. A.R. It was also informed that copies of receipts given to the vendee stated to have been furnished as additional evidence under Rule 46A are not on record. In response a letter dated 14/07/2016 was furnished with copies of documents claimed to have been furnished earlier. It was stated that these documents evidence receipt of money on sale of property and could not be produced earlier for want of sufficient opportunity. It was stated in the petition as under: "The appellant herewith submit copies of the document demonstrating acquisition of the asset in 1998 through document no. 956/1998, sale document in 2003 as per which the sale consideration is Rs.3,50,000 which has a market value of Rs.6,50,000 and copies of the receipts acknowledging receipt of Rs.10,50,000 through two receipts that are given to the vendees of which Rs.3,20,000 is cash and Rs.7,30,000 is in the form cheques, and Bank statement of Andhra Bank a/c No.00421431 wherein these cheques were deposited with a petition under rule 46A of I.T. Rules”.

8.

Having regard to the circumstances of the addition brought out in the assessment order the above documents are admitted into consideration.

9.

It is the stand of the assessee that she owned house property at Mahaboobnagar evidenced by the document No.956 of 1998, which was sold in the year 2003 as evidenced by the document No. 4754 of 2003. The sale proceeds received in relation to this transaction was Rs.3,20,000/- in cash vide receipt dated 11/08/2003 and two amounts Rs.3.5 lakhs and 3.8 lakhs vide cheque No.48883 and 48877 dated 28/09/2003. cheques are found credited in the Andhra Bank Savings Bank a/c no.421431 which is seen to have been opened at its Dilsukhnagar Branch on 02/09/2003. These cheques are found credited to this account on 01/10/2003 and 21/10/2003 by one Sri B. Srinivas Reddy. The total sale consideration of the House Property as per written submissions is claimed to be Rs.10,50,000/-. However, as per sale deed registered as document No. 4754/2003 with the District

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →