Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a retired government employee, purchased agricultural land for Rs. 5.52 lakhs. The Assessing Officer initially treated Rs. 4.02 lakhs as unexplained investment, which was later reduced to Rs. 2.22 lakhs by the First Appellate Authority. The assessee contended that this Rs. 2.22 lakhs was an advance from his son for the land purchase, which the authorities did not accept.
Held
The Tribunal found that the advance of Rs. 2.22 lakhs received by the assessee from his son for the agricultural land purchase was satisfactorily explained. The son's audited financials, showing significant contract receipts, net profit, and fixed assets, proved his financial capacity to advance the said amount. Consequently, the addition sustained by the First Appellate Authority was deleted.
Key Issues
Whether the Rs. 2.22 lakhs received by the assessee from his son for agricultural land purchase constituted an unexplained investment, and if the son's financial capacity to provide the advance was adequately demonstrated.
Sections Cited
143(3), 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
ORDER Per: Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Addl / JCIT (A) – 1, Gurugram, dated 23/01/2025, which has emanated from the order of the AO Ward 3(2) / Ferozpur, passed u/s 143(3) of the act 61 dated 18/12/2019.
There are fourteen grounds taken by the assessee in the memorandum of appeal in form 36 where reopening of proceedings vide notice u/s 148 dated 28/03/2019, has been challenged on account of recording of reasons on borrowed satisfaction of investigation wing and on merits the dispute revolves around an addition of Rs. 2,22,000/- ( Rs. Two lakhs twenty two thousand ) , being sustained by the Ld. first appellate authority , being loans and advances taken by the assessee from his son for purchase of a landed property.
The brief facts are that the assessee is a retired State Government employee, deriving monthly pension of Rs. 15,500/- approx. and has income from agricultural activities, and his son Mr Ravinder Singh is a Government contractor, and both are residing together in joint family. The assessee invested an amount of Rs. 5.52 lakhs in purchase of an agricultural land during the year under appeal which has been partly sourced out of his pension income and partly out of agricultural receipts and balance of Rs. 2.22 lakhs has been advanced by his son Ravinder Singh, who has separate source of income being a Government contractor.
In course of assessment proceedings, the AO accepted the agricultural income of Rs. 1.50 lakhs for the year but added back the balance amount of Rs. 4.02 lakhs as unexplained investment for purchase of land.
The matter carried in first appeal has been partly allowed by the Ld. first appellate authority who deleted an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- being satisfactorily explained to have come out of bank withdrawals from Government pension received as evidenced by bank pass book.
Now the assessee is before the tribunal on the sustained addition of Rs.2.22 lakhs, being the amount received by the assessee from his son for investment in purchase of the agricultural land.
There was no appearance by the assessee or his ld. AR on the date of hearing on repeated calls neither physically or in virtual mode only an application seeking adjournment has been filed by the AR on being busy elsewhere for professional work.
Considering the materials on record, and the minor issue involved we dispose off this appeal after hearing the Ld. DR.
The assessee along with the appeal, has filed a copy of the audited financials of his son Mr. Ravinder Singh Contractor for the Asst year 2012-13, along with schedules, as proof of his son’s income earning capacity, which reflects an advance of Rs. 2.22 lakhs given to his father Malkiat Singh Dhaliwal ( assessee in this case), as on 31/03/2012.
9.1 It is further seen that the son is engaged in contract and has received Rs. 62.54 lakhs as contract receipts during the year and has disclosed a net profit of Rs.4.63 lakhs ( after all expenses ) and is owner of fixed assets valued at Rs.8.74 lakhs ( which includes a car and a tractor ), which proves he is a person of average means and is financially capable of investing a meagre amount of Rs.2.22 lakhs ( two lakhs twenty two thousand ) in agricultural property by way of advance to his father ( the assessee in this case).
The copy of the Advance schedule is enclosed as evidence.
The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Ld. first appellate authority.
We are of the opinion that the advance of Rs2.22 lakhs received by the assessee from his son for investment in purchase of agricultural land is satisfactorily explained and the same is accepted and the addition made by the AO sustained by the Ld. first appellate authority is deleted.