2023 (4) TMI 997 - AT - Income Tax

Tax Appeals Decided: Undisclosed Income, Cash Deposits, Marriage Expenses

The appeals for various assessment years were heard regarding issues such as undisclosed income, unexplained deposits, cash deposits, marriage expenses, ... Unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts - main contention of the Ld.AR is that the assessee has received partial amount by way of cheque against sale cum GPA agreement from Sri S.Veera Raghavareddy as advance - AR pleaded that the same amount cannot be taxed twice and prayed for relief - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, the assessee has received Rs.15,00,000/- by way of cheque from Shri Veera Raghava Reddy as loan against property by way of execution of GPA cum sale agreement for security. This fact was not disputed by the revenue. We find from the arguments of the Ld.AR that the Ld.AO order has given a detailed breakup of cash deposits and cheque deposits in assessee’s bank account - We find from the table as extracted in Ld.AO’s order that the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was included while disallowing the cash deposits - We, therefore find merit in the argument of the Ld.AR that the same amount cannot be taxed twice in the hands of the assessee. We are therefore of the considered view that since the same amount cannot be taxed twice, we direct the Ld.AO to delete the addition. Decided in favour of assessee. Addition of agricultural income - contention of the Ld.AR that the assessee is deriving agricultural income from Ac.29.76 cnts owned by her but the AO rejected the contention of the assessee holding that the assessee has not produced revenue records in support of her claim - HELD THAT:- We find, that the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly estimated the agricultural income of the assessee basing on the valid proposition. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee on this ground Issues Involved:1. Condonation of Delay2. Addition of Undisclosed/Unaccounted Income3. Addition of Unexplained Cash Deposits4. Addition of Unexplained Marriage Expenses5. Addition of Unexplained Real Estate Commission6. Addition of Agricultural IncomeCondonation of Delay:These appeals were filed with a delay of 54 days due to the illness of the assessee's father. The Tribunal found reasonable cause for the delay and condoned it, admitting the appeals for hearing.Addition of Undisclosed/Unaccounted Income:In I.T.A.No.98/Viz/2019 for A.Y.2011-12, the AO made additions of Rs.62,48,500/- as undisclosed income and Rs.25,57,294/- as unexplained deposits. The CIT(A) granted partial relief by accepting Rs.37,12,000/- as loan against property and Rs.25,36,500/- as explained deposits. The Tribunal found merit in the argument that Rs.15,00,000/- was taxed twice and directed the AO to delete this amount, partly allowing the appeal.Addition of Unexplained Cash Deposits:In I.T.A.No.99/Viz/2019 for A.Y.2012-13, the AO added Rs.12,07,534/- as unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) provided substantial relief by disallowing only 50% of Rs.2,19,500/- due to lack of vouchers. The Tribunal upheld this decision, dismissing the appeal.In I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2019 for A.Y.2013-14, the AO added Rs.2,40,000/- and Rs.1,23,450/- as unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) disallowed 50% of Rs.2,40,000/- and confirmed the addition of Rs.1,23,450/-. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the appeal.Addition of Unexplained Marriage Expenses:In I.T.A.No.99/Viz/2019 for A.Y.2012-13, the AO added Rs.7,94,239/- for unexplained marriage expenses. The CIT(A) provided substantial relief, and the Tribunal upheld this decision, dismissing the appeal.Addition of Unexplained Real Estate Commission:In I.T.A.No.100/Viz/2019 for A.Y.2013-14, the AO added Rs.1,23,450/- as unexplained real estate commission. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition due to lack of supporting evidence. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the appeal.Addition of Agricultural Income:In I.T.A.101/Viz/2019 to 103/Viz/2019 for A.Y.2008-09 to 2010-11, the AO rejected the agricultural income claim of Rs.6,25,000/-. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, estimating reasonable agricultural income at Rs.5,95,200/- and confirming the addition of Rs.29,800/-. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the appeals.Conclusion:In conclusion, the appeals for A.Ys 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2012-13, and 2013-14 were dismissed, and the appeal for A.Y.2011-12 was partly allowed.Order pronounced in the open court on 21st April, 2023.