TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 939
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....penses of Rs. 27,64,744/-, and (ii) unexplained cash credits of Rs. 3,70,224/-. 3. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and filed a return of income for the Asst. Year 2011-12 on 20.10.2011 and admitted income from other sources of Rs. 7,20,914/-. The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short), and thereafter the case was selected for scrutiny assessment and notices under section 143(2) of the Act were issued from time to time. Only after seventh hearing notice, the assessee has started participating in the assessment proceedings by filing replies. During the assessment year, the assessee sold a piece of land at Adalaj, Gandhinagar for total consideration of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for borewell 200,000/- Final payment of borewell 140,000/- Miscellaneous work 519,914/- TOTAL 27,64,744 4. The AO has also found that in the liability side of the balance sheet the assessee has shown unsecured loan of Rs. 1,43,96,816/-. Out of which an amount of Rs. 5,09,316/- was shown from Damini Hemalbhai Patel and Rs. 3,87,500/- from Wagad Concrete U. The assessee was asked vide show cause notice dated 23.12.2013 and 10.2.2014 to furnish confirmation, genuineness and capacity of the parties with regard to the above cash credit. In reply to this, the assessee simply stated "the transaction carrying out with Damini Patel was also a business transaction, she is my wife and in the said relationship. On looking to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rising cost of acquisition Rs. 28,38,000/-, Stamp paper and other charges Rs. 2,11,800/- and cost of leveling and other expenses Rs. 27,64,744/- and balance of Rs. 6,85,456/- has been offered as income under the head Income from other sources. The AO has disallowed expenditure of Rs. 27,64,744/- from total cost of land claimed as deduction by the appellant stating the appellant has not furnished any evidence for such expenditure. The Appellant, on the other hand, has furnished the break of total expenditure of Rs. 27,64,744/- along with relevant bills and stated that expenditure has been incurred on land to make it saleable and hence shall be allowed as deduction from Sale Consideration. On careful consideration of facts and detail....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....el and Wagad Concrete respectively during the year under consideration. However the appellant has failed to prove identity, capacity and genuineness of such unsecured loans and hence the same has been treated as unexplained and added to income of the appellant. The appellant has argued that unsecured loan in question is genuine since entire amount is received through account payee cheque. Further the appellant argued that out of total Unsecured loan of Rs. 509316/- received from Damini Hemalbhai Patel - Rs. 1,39,092/- are received in previous year and therefore such amount cannot be treated as unexplained during the year under consideration. The appellant has relied on various case laws in support of its argument that addition u/s. 68 canno....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed Paper Book running into 18 pages, and pleaded that disallowance made by the AO to be deleted. In support of his submission, he relied upon the decision dated 29.9.2019 of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Jatinkumar Amrutilal Shah Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 307/Ahd/2017. 9. Per contra, the Ld. DR, Smt. Leela Lal appearing for the Revenue supported the order of the lower authorities, and further pleaded that it is a well considered order both by the AO and the CIT(A), therefore, it does not require any interference as the assessee has not produced any new material to substantiate claim, and accordingly prayed for dismissal of the appeal filed by the assessee. 10. We have given our thoughtful consideration of the matter, and perused m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of Income in Form No. 2 which is meant for individuals & HUF, NOT having income from Business or Profession. Thus, the assessee was not in clear mind to file the prescribed form and also claimed allowable expenditure, within the provisions of law. Thus, the lower authorities' finding of disallowance of Rs. 27,64,744/- does not require any interference. The case law relied upon by the assessee's counsel viz. Jatinkumar Amrutilal shah (supra) is clearly distinguishable with the facts of the present case wherein the assessee produced proper invoice, bills, etc. in support of the expenses incurred by that assessee. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are hereby rejected. 11. Now coming to the addition made under section 68 of ....