TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 1007
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to have appreciated the fact that the assessee's ultimate aim was to construct a house for availing exemption under section 54F and as this aim was always present in his mind it is impossible that the assessee would have frittered away Rs.29,34,600 leaving him penniless to this extent to meet the cost of construction of the new house at Mangadu. 3. The learned Commissioner of income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the fact that the assessee's case is a no accounts case and in no accounts cases assessment of unexplained credits is not contemplated by the act. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the fact that the entire sum of Rs.97,82,000/- had been invested in the new construction at Mangadu without wasting a single pie on any other items. 5. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the fact that when there is direct nexus between the amounts got back from his relatives and the investment in a flat at Mangadu for the same amount the addition of a sum of Rs.29,34,600 as unexplained income by the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) militates against the principle of telescoping any ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eposit of Rs.119.35 Lacs include share of mother and sister which were settled by the assessee. The bench, in para-8, held that exemption u/s 54F could be claimed only in case the property was purchased by the assessee in his own name and therefore, this ground was dismissed. Regarding addition of Rs.97.82 Lacs, it was noted that the money was withdrawn and utilized for the purchase of land on 21.01.2011 and the construction was commenced. Therefore, the conclusion of Ld. AO was without any basis or evidence. It was also noted that the cheques were also issued, however, there was no clarity whether the said sum was utilized for construction of building. Accordingly, Ld. AO was directed to verify the said facts. Regarding addition of Rs.21.53 Lacs, the matter was set aside to Ld. AO for limited purpose to verify that the excess amount deposited by the assessee pertained to mother and sister. The adjudication of the Tribunal was as under: - 8. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record and judicial decisions cited. On the issue of claim of exemption u/sec. 54F of the Act, the ld. Authorised Representative argued grounds and filed written submissions ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the residential property is from undisclosed source which are different from Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd are without any basis or evidence. But on perusal of Bank account produced in hearing proceedings, we found that cheques were also issued in the name of the persons, and there is no clarity on issue whether the said sum was utilized for the construction of residential building. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the matter has to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer in the above context. Considering the apparent facts and circumstances, we set aside the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and remit the issue to the file of Assessing Officer for verification. 10. On the last ground, the ld. Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.21,53,000/- being not satisfied with the submissions on the internal family arrangement between the family members of the assessee. The mother and sister co-operated in the execution of sale deed of land and Rs.35,00,000/- was allotted towards sister share and Rs.10,00,000/- to the mother. Since the sister was not available at the time of transaction, installment amount of share of sister and mother share Rs.10,00,000/- as mo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....these persons to appear, however, none expressed willingness to appear before Ld. AO. Only one person i.e., Shri S. Muthu Saravanan appeared and stated that he was not aware of the confirmation letter as filed by the assessee and the confirmation was not given by him. Therefore, the letter was held to be fabricated. It was also noted that the tiles were purchased even before the purchase of land on which the house was going to be constructed. Therefore, the confirmations letters were held to the fabricated and the amount of Rs.97.82 Lacs as stated to be invested in the construction of the house was held to be unexplained investments. 4. Regarding addition of Rs.21.53 Lacs, the assessee submitted that Rs.11.53 Lacs belonged to sister and the balance Rs.10 Lacs belonged to his mother. However, in the absence of any material evidence forthcoming from the assessee, the said amount was added to the income of the assessee as unexplained income. However, this addition has been deleted by Ld. CIT(A) and the same is not the subject matter of dispute before us. 5. Upon further appeal, Ld. CIT(A) noted that the construction of house involves cash purchases from many people most of whom ....