ANU AGARWAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 68/DDN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun24 March 2021AY 2016-176 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's explanation regarding savings from earlier years and 'Streedhan' was tenable, considering Indian traditions and the need for cash for business contingencies. The addition was therefore deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased a house property and claimed a portion of the investment as unexplained. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 7,15,000/-. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, confirming an addition of Rs. 2,15,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the unexplained investment in house property, including savings and 'Streedhan', can be added to the assessee's income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 61,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN CIRCUIT BENCH: DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE

Hearing: 19.03.2021Pronounced: 24.03.2021

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

1.

1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.04.2019 passed by CIT(A)- Dehradun for Assessment Year 2016-17.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. That the Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming an addition of Rs. 2,15,000/- as unexplained investment in house property.”

3. The assessee is an individual and she derives income from sale and purchase of spices. Return of income was filed on 28/03/2017 declaring total income of Rs. 5,08,190/- The assessment order was passed on 22/12/2018 thereby making addition of Rs.7,15,000/- assessed u/s 61 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Section 115BBE of the Act.

4.

Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.

5.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee but through post we have received written submissions of the assessee herself for proceedings with the matter on the basis of written submissions. The same are as follows:-

1.

“Facts of the Case:-I am an individual enjoying income from sale and purchase of spices. Return of income was filed showing an income of Rs. 5,08,190/-.During the year under consideration I purchased a residential house situated at Subhash Road, Dehradun jointly with my husband ,Shri Ashok Kumar Agarwal, for Rs. 1,45,15,000/-. My share of investment in house is Rs. 95,43,189/-.

2.

That the learned A.O has disallowed a sum of Rs.7,15,000/- as unexplained investment in purchase of house as under:-

Rs. 3,60,000/- being savings out of current year’s income. Rs. 3,55,000/- out of savings of earlier years. Rs .7,15,000/- In appeal the learned CIT (A) has allowed a consolidated deduction of Rs.5,00,000/- and confirmed the balance of Rs. 2,15,000/- as unexplained investment

3.

That my submissions are as under:- a) Addition of Rs.3.60.000/- made bv learned A.O. out of current income.

“The investment of Rs.3,60,000/- out of income of year under consideration, for Rs. 5,28,192/- is very reasonable as I am joint in mess with my husband and two unmarried sons. My husband and my two sons are separately assessed to tax. The total number of family members is four and total withdrawals of four persons amount to Rs.4,95,223/-. The withdrawals for household expenses are very reasonable. The standard of living of the family is very ordinary. We are living in an old ancestral house and no rent was paid. Keeping in view all the aspects of the case, no addition in income is called for. b) Addition of Rs.3.55.000/- made by the learned A.O. out of savings of earlier year’s. “Regarding savings of earlier years amounting to Rs.3,55,000/-, it may be submitted that I have been assessed to tax for the last more than 15 years I give below the position of my income assessed for the last five years:-

S. A.Y Income No. Assessed 1 2015-16 5,37,565.00 2 2014-15 2,51,130,00 3 2013-14 2,45,660,00 4 2012-13 1,92,709.00 5 2011-12 1,92,678.00

The sum of Rs. 3,55,000/- represented my savings out of income of earlier years as well as my “Streedhan”. I am aged about 48 years. It may be mentioned that Indian ladies generally keep some savings with them to meet any contingency and urgent needs as “Streedhan”.

In view of the above facts, no addition in income is called for.

4.That the learned CIT(A) confirmed an addition of Rs. 2,15,000/- out of Rs. 7,15,000/-.There appears to be no justification for any addition to my income. It is requested that the addition of Rs.2,15,000/- may kindly be deleted for which i shall feel highly obliged.”

6 The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).

7.

We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. From perusal of the order of the CIT(A), it is clear that the assessee has given break up of personal drawings of the cash as well as break up taken out by the husband and two unmarried sons. As related to the amount of Rs.3,55,000/- , the same represents her savings out of income of earlier years as well as her “Streedhan”. For this, she has given the reason that Indian women generally keep some savings with them to meet contingency expenses and urgent needs. The explanation given by the assessee appears to be tenable as she has demonstrated through her written submissions that the cash of Rs.2,15,000/- has an element of savings for the contingencies of the family of four which also includes her “Streedhan”. Though the CIT(A) has raised the doubt that these “Streedhan” cannot be in cash, it is in fact in Indian tradition certain amount in cash is given by the relatives to the women in the family especially from the woman’s father side. further, the assessee is also a self- employer/entrepreneur who derives certain income from sale and purchase of spices and therefore, has to keep certain amount of cash in hand for purchase of the items/necessary goods for preparing spices in case of emergency/contingencies. These facts were totally ignored by the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A). Hence, we are allowing the appeal of the assessee.

More judgments on Section 61

All 82 judgments and leading authorities on Section 61 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →