Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessment for AY 2011-12 was reopened due to non-filing of ITR and a financial transaction involving the purchase of immovable property. The AO made an addition of Rs. 17,02,140/-, representing 50% of the unexplained portion of the property's cost and stamp duty, after accounting for a bank loan. The assessee contended that she was merely a joint owner and her husband had arranged the funds through a loan and his own resources, a plea which the CIT(A) did not accept due to lack of documents.
Held
The Tribunal condoned a 284-day delay in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee's explanation as a housewife with a communication gap with her husband. It admitted additional evidences, including the husband's bank statements and builder payment receipts, finding them relevant but requiring verification. The assessment order was set aside, and the issue on merits was restored to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication after considering the newly admitted additional evidences.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; admissibility of additional evidence regarding property purchase funding; and the validity of the addition made by the AO for unexplained property cost.
Sections Cited
Income-tax Act, 1961 (Section 147), Income-tax Act, 1961 (Section 143(3)), IT(AT) Rules, 1963 (Rule 29)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
The assessee has come in appeal against the order dated 28.06.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (hereinafter referred as Delhi-18/10343/2018-19, for the assessment year 2011-12, arising out of the assessment order dated 23.12.2018 u/s 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the “Act”), passed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-53(5), New Delhi (hereinafter referred in short as “Ld. AO”).
Heard and perused the record.
2.1 At the outset it is pointed out that the appeal has been filed in this Tribunal with delay of 284 days. Learned AR has pointed out that assessee is a house-wife and her husband is posted at Mumbai and thus there was communication gap for which she could not inform her husband of the orders, leading to delay in filing of the appeal. Considering that the delay is not of substantial period and the plea appears to be genuine, the delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing.
On further hearing it comes up that an application under Rule 29 of the IT(AT) Rules, 1963 is filed on behalf of the appellant seeking opportunity to adduce additional evidences.
Learned AR has submitted that these additional evidences are quite material and primarily the bank account statements of the appellant’s husband and receipts of payments to the builder are being filed.
Learned DR has submitted that opportunity was there with the assessee to file these documents before learned tax authorities below. tax authorities below we find that primarily the case of assessee is of reopening u/s 147 of the Act due to non-filing of ITR and financial transactions executed related to purchase of immovable property. The AO has observed that the property was purchased for Rs. 1,18,29,780/- by the assessee along with her husband Shri Nipun Kaushal. A loan of Rs. 90,00,000/- was arranged from IDBI Bank. With regard to remaining part of the consideration, Rs. 28,29,780/- and stamp duty of Rs. 5,74,500/- there was no explanation by the assessee and accordingly taking the share of assessee of 50%, addition of Rs. 17,02,140/- was made.
The claim of the learned AR is that name of assessee was added merely as a joint owner otherwise the amount was arranged by the husband by loan and his own resources.
We find that learned CIT(A) has not accepted this plea on the basis of lack of documents. In the light of aforesaid, after going through the additional evidences filed we find the same to be quite relevant and go to the root of the controversy. However, the same require verification. Accordingly, the additional evidences are admitted and setting aside the assessment order, the issue on merits is restored to the file of Ld. AO, with direction to take the additional evidences of the assessee on record and call for further information, if any, and pass an order afresh.
Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 10.10.2024.