VIGNESWARA ENTERPRISES ,CHENNAI vs. ITO NCW 10(6), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 458/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 October 2024AY 2018-191 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the purchases and added them to the assessee's income as unexplained expenditure under section 69C r.w.s 115BBE of the Act. The CIT(A) confirmed this. The assessee's representative stated that the plots were purchased in AY 2014-15 but omitted from the books and payments were made from regular accounts.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in real estate development, is in appeal against the confirmation of an addition of Rs.21.38 Lacs. The addition was made on account of purchases of immovable properties from AY 2015-16 being erroneously included in the current year's purchases, leading to disallowance as unexplained expenditure.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs.21.38 Lacs as unexplained expenditure is justified, or if the purchases can be accounted for in prior periods.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 115BBE,Section 143(3),Section 143(3A),Section 143(3B)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

(िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/s. Vigneswara Enterprises ITO Flat No.1 & 7, 4th Cross Street, बनाम/ Non-Corporate Ward-10(6) Bakthavatchalam Nagar, Adyar, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 020. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AALFV-9726-H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Ms. Lekha (CA) - Ld.AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Deeptha (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 01-10-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 09-10-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 27-12-2022 in the matter of an assessment framed by the Ld. AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act on 08-04-2021. In the present appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of addition of Rs.21.38 Lacs u/s.69C r.w.s 115BBE of the Act. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed- off as under.

2.

The assessee being resident firm is stated to be engaged in real estate development. During assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee purchased immovable properties for total value of Rs.559.99 Lacs. Upon perusal of details as furnished by the assessee, Ld. AO noted that the properties for Rs.21.38 Lacs was purchased during AY 2015-16 (on 01-12-2014) whereas the assessee included the same in the purchase of this year. The purchases were inflated to that extent. Accordingly, the purchases as claimed in this year was disallowed and added to the income of the assessee as unexplained expenditure u/s.69C r.w.s 115BBE of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same as prior period expenses since the assessee could not establish the source of these purchases. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

The Ld. AR has stated that the plots under consideration were purchased during AY 2014-15 but the same were omitted to be accounted for in the books of accounts. The Ld. AR also submitted that the payment for purchases have been made out of regular books of accounts. Considering the same, we restore this issue back to the file of Ld. AO with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case. All the issues are kept open.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 9th October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा34 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद6 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे8ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 09-10-2024 DS आदेशकीIितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु@/CIT Chennai. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडEफाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →