Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal arose from an order confirming an addition of Rs. 3.91 Lacs as unexplained money. The assessee claimed this amount was paid by his father as earnest money for a property purchase, and that a Rs. 4 Lacs cash loan was given to his father in earlier years.
Held
The Tribunal held that the Rs. 3.91 Lacs earnest money was fully explained as coming from the assessee's father. The Tribunal also noted a discrepancy in the Assessing Officer's computation of total income and directed a re-computation.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of Rs. 3.91 Lacs as unexplained money was justified. Whether there was a discrepancy in the Assessing Officer's total income computation.
Sections Cited
144B, 147, 69A, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Amit Anand ITO H.No.2175/A, Sector 38-C Ward 2(1) बनाम/ Vs. Chandigarh. Chandigarh-160017. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AGBPA-0901-D (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh Vineet Krishan (Advocate) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 21-05-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 28-12-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144B r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 16-09.2021. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under.
The assessee declared income of Rs.3.97 Lacs in regular return of income. However, the case was reopened on 19-03-2020 on the allegation that the assessee purchased a property from M/s Bajwa Developers Pvt. Ltd. and made payment of Rs.3.91 Lacs which was not disclosed in the return of income. The assessee refuted the allegation of Ld. AO on the ground that the impugned payment was made by his late father who was running consultancy business and looking after assessee’s investments. It was also stated that the assessee paid advance of Rs.4 Lacs during FY 2011-12 to his father which was duly reflected in the Balance Sheet. The earnest money of Rs.3.91 Lacs was stated to be paid by his father. However, Ld. AO added the amount of Rs.3.91 Lacs in the hands of the assessee as unexplained money u/s 69A. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.
Upon perusal of ITR-4 as filed by the assessee on 31-03-2014, it could be seen that the assessee has reflected loans (assets) for Rs.5 Lacs in the return of income. Similar amount has been reflected in return filed on 28-05-2021 during reassessment proceedings. The same apparently include the cash loan of Rs.4 Lacs as given by the assessee to his father in earlier years. The same is also reflected in the Balance Sheet as on 31-03-2012 as extracted in the impugned order. The perusal of loan ledger extract would show that this is cash loan and accordingly, the same would not appear in the bank statement of the assessee. On these facts, in our considered opinion, the claim of the assessee is to be accepted. The source of earnest money of Rs.3.91 Lacs stood fully explained. Therefore, we delete the impugned additions as made by Ld. AO. It is seen that in the assessment order, Ld. AO has computed total income of Rs.7.89 Lacs but in the computation sheet, the total income has been computed as Rs.11.86 Lacs and there is apparent discrepancy between the two. Accordingly, Ld. AO is directed to re-compute the correct income of the assessee.
The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced on 22-05-2025.