MAYANK BHARADIYA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1783/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 March 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the interest of justice would be served by giving the assessee an opportunity to produce evidence for the source of investment. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for verification.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition made by the Assessing Officer. The addition was related to the purchase of immovable property where the assessee allegedly failed to prove the source of funds.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to prove the source of investment for the property purchase, and if not, whether the matter should be remanded.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG

For Appellant: Shri M S Chhajed, AR
For Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.DR
Hearing: 25.02.2025Pronounced: 17.03.2025

Date of Hearing 25.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 17.03.2025 O R D E R

The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Ahmedabad/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)’] dated 19.07.2023 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2016-17.

2.

The assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the Ld.CIT(A), confirming the addition of Rs.22,33,333/- out of the total addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.44,33,000/- u/s.69 of the Act, on account of failure of the assessee to prove the source of the amount paid for purchase of immovable property.

3.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the total sale consideration of the property was Rs.1,30,00,000/- which was purchased by his 3 family members with 1/3 shares each. He has further submitted that the source of aforesaid amount Rs.1,30,00,000/- was that Rs. 21,00,000/- was paid by the assessee from his own bank account and Rs.35,00,000/- was arranged through loan from bank and the balance amount was paid by the two co- owners, who are brother and father respectively of the assessee, out of their bank accounts. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee could not produce the evidence of the aforesaid source of the amount before the Assessing Officer, resulting into impugned addition made by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer as the entire amount was paid by the assessee, his brother and father out of their bank account as well as from the loan raised from the bank, which can be duly verified, and that there cannot be an element of afterthought in this case.

4.

I am of the view that the interests of justice will be well served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to produce the aforesaid evidence of source of investment in immovable property. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Assessing Officer with the direction to verify the aforesaid contention of the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce the relevant evidences before the Assessing Officer as and when called for to prove the source of consideration for the purchase of property in question.

5.

With the above observation, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 17.03.2025

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →