2021 (2) TMI 467

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 29.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs. NIL. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under section 143(3) of the IT Act. The AO while completing the assessment under section 143(3) of the IT Act has made an addition of Rs. 6,50,000/- on account of unexplained investment under section 69B of the IT Act. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the ld. CIT (A). However, the ld. CIT (A) has upheld the assessment order confirming the addition. 3. We have heard the rival contentions and carefully perused the material available on record, judgments cited by the both the parties as well as the o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was further submitted that the revenue has not placed any evidence to show that the assessee had made any such investment. In order to support his version, the assessee relied on the decisions of Hon'ble High Courts in the cases of CIT vs. Naresh Khattar (HUF) 261 ITR 664 (Delhi), Smt. Amar Kumari Surana vs. CIT, 226 ITR 344 (Raj.) wherein it was held that the burden is on the revenue to prove the real investments exceeding investments shown in the books of account of the assessee. 3.1. After having gone through the facts of the present case and after perusal of the statements made by the sellers under section 131 of the Act, we find that in the entire statements of the sellers nowhere name of the assessee was mentioned. Apart from reco....