Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- for AY 2012-13. The addition was based on the disbelieving of the sources of funds for purchasing a residential property.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The assessee successfully provided evidence, including bank statements and affidavits, to substantiate the creditworthiness of the sources of funds (father and cousin) for the property purchase.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee provided sufficient evidence for the sources of funds for property acquisition to the satisfaction of the Tribunal.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
(A.Y.2012-13) Desh Raj Singh, C/o Chaurasia and Associates, C-2302, ATS Advantage, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201014 ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant PAN: ARBPS-7790-P बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -68(5), Civic Centre, Minto Road, ..... �ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant by : Shri Venketesh Chaurasia, Advocates �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, SR.DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 29/07/2025 आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)] dated 26.07.2024, for Assessment Year 2012-13.
The appeal is time barred by 203 days. The assessee has filed an application supported by an affidavit citing reasons causing delay in filing of appeal. After perusal of the same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, the delay has been caused for the reasons stated in petition which appears to be (AY 2012-13) bonafide. Thus, delay of 203 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for decision on merits.
Shri Venketesh Chaurasia, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the assessee had purchased residential property for a total consideration of Rs.30,25,000/- on 19.03.2012. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to explain the source of funds for purchase of said property. The assessee explained the source of funds as under:- Amounts Source of Funds Rs.15,00,000/- HDFC Bank Ltd.- Loan Rs.15,00,000/- Shri Mahavir, Father of the assessee Rs.7,00,000/- Shri Ombir Singh, Cousin of the assessee 4. The AO partly accepted details furnished by the assessee. The Assesing Officer (AO) accepted the source of Rs.15,00,000/- from HDFC Bank Ltd. The other two source of funds aggregating to Rs.22,00,000/- were disbelieved and the AO made addition of Rs. 22,00,000/-. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee had received Rs.15,00,000/- from his father to substantiate his contention he placed on record a copy of Indian Overseas Bank saving bank account passbook of his father. Referring to the said passbook, he submitted that father of the assessee had sufficient source to advance Rs.15,00,000-/- to the assessee. The father of the assessee was an agriculturist. Part of his land was acquired by GAIL India Ltd. for laying down pipelines. The father of the assessee had received compensation for said acquisition of land. The ld. Counsel also furnished photo copies of the cheques received by father of the assessee on 09.06.2011, 10.10.2011 and 23.10.2011 at page no. 7 to 9 of the paper book. The ld. Counsel further placed on (AY 2012-13) record copy of the Punjab National Bank saving account passbook of Shir Ombir Singh to substantiate that Rs.7,00,000/- was received by him from his cousin.
Per contra, Ms. Sudha Gupta representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. The ld. DR submitted that the assessee failed to furnish relevant documents before the AO and CIT(A) to substantiate that the amounts were received by the assessee from his father and cousin, respectively.
Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The assessee during the course of assessment proceedings could not furnish relevant documents to show source of funds to the extent of Rs.22,00,000/-. Hence, the AO invoked the provisions of section 144 of the Act and completed the assessment. Likewise, the assessee failed to furnish details before the First Appellate Authority. Hence, the CIT(A) in absence of any supporting material confirmed the addition of Rs.22,00,000/-. Before us, the assessee has furnished bank statement of his father Shri Mahavir along with photocopy of cheques that his father had received from GAIL India Ltd. as compensation. The assessee has been able to prove creditworthiness of his father. The assessee has also placed on record copy of affidavit of his father Shri Mahavir (now deceased) that was filed before the AO confirming advancing of Rs.15,00,000/- to the assessee. The assessee has also taken Rs.7,00,000/- from his cousin Shri Ombir Singh. The assesee has placed on record a photocopy of bank passbook of Shri Ombir Singh. The same shows that there were sufficient balance in the bank account of Shri Ombir Singh for advancing to the assessee. Thus, the assessee has been able to show creditworthiness of both the persons. Hence, addition of Rs.15,00,000/- and Rs.7,00,000/- (Rs.22,00,000/-) is directed to be deleted.