LATE SHRI MANJOOR ALI, THR. L.H. & WIDOW SMT. KHATOON, C/O G.MEHTA & CO. PARAS, 127, HARI MARG, CIVIL LINES, JAIPUR-302006,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(4), JAIPUR, WARD-3(4), JAIPUR

ITA 265/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 April 2019AY 2014-154 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO/CIT(A) ignored the assessee's agricultural income and past savings. Considering the accepted agricultural and other income, the addition of Rs. 4,95,661/- as unexplained investment was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased a car for Rs. 13,12,381/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) accepted the declared job income but added Rs. 4,95,661/- as unexplained investment in the car purchase. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 4,95,661/- as unexplained investment for car purchase is justified, considering the assessee's agricultural income and past savings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES “SMC”, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 265/JP/19

For Appellant: Shri G.M Mehta, FCA, ld.AR jktLo dh vksj ls@

Hearing: 16/04/2019Pronounced: 23/04/2019

vkns'k@ ORDER

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex parte order of ld.CIT(A)-22, Alwar dated 29/01/2019 for the A.Y 2014-15 in the matter of an assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by the addition of Rs.4,95,661/- made on purchase of car.

Rival contentions have been heard and record perused.

2 Late Sh. Manjoor Ali L/H Smt. Khatoon 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee, late Sh. Manjoor Ali (expired on 02.05.2017) had bought a car for Rs.13,12,381/- in May, 2013 for the use in his profession to earn job income. The AO accepted the declared job income, but made addition of Rs.4,95,661/- treating it as his unexplained income in purchase of car.

By the impugned ex parte order, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO.

The ld.AR argued that the assessee was assessed for the last more than 30 years. At para(2) at page No.(2) of order appealed against, ld.AO also admitted that he is regularly filing his ITRs. Besides job income, assessee had agricultural income from 57 bighas of irrigated land in Distt. Hanumangarh. However, while accepting assessee’s current year’s income as his total savings, the ld.AO did not allow benefit of his earlier year’ s savings or depreciations.

I have considered the rival contentions and found that the AO made addition of Rs.4,95,661/- for purchase of car as per following details:

S.No. Source of purchase of car Amount (Rs.) 1 Loan from Union Bank of India 6,00,000/- 2 Current year’s income(job income) 2,16,720/- 3 Unexplained investment 4,95,661/- 4 Purchase price of car 13,12,381/-

3 Late Sh. Manjoor Ali L/H Smt. Khatoon 8. In making/sustaining addition of Rs.4,95,661/- ld.AO/CIT(A) ignored the fact that it a non-account case in which besides job income, assessee had agricultural income from 57 bighas of irrigated land in Distt. Hanumangarh. The net agricultural income declared and accepted by the department for three years stood as under:- S.No. Asstt. Years Agrl. Income (Rs.) 1 A.Y 2012-13 1,87,513/- 2. A.Y 2013-14 2,67,992/- 3 A.Y 2014-15 2,84,863/- 9. Assessee was assessed for last more than 30 years, but no benefit of past savings from professional and agricultural income was allowed in treating Rs.4,95,661/- as unexplained income.

10.

Considering the agricultural and other income as offered by the assessee and which has been accepted by the department, I find no merit in making the addition of Rs.4,95,661/- as unexplained investment by the AO for purchase of a car. Accordingly, I direct the AO to delete the same. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.

11.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →