TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (10) TMI 1253
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....01.2019 which is arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2019. 2. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds: "1a. That, the Ld. A.O. erred and the C.I.T.(A) wrongly confirmed the addition of Rs. 42,10,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. of the Act in respect of unsecured loan taken by the appellant alleging the appellant's failure to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors in spite of the fact that as per evidence on record the identity of the loanees and their creditworthiness are well established. 1b. That the Ld. A.O. erred and the C.I.T.(A) wrongly upheld the treatment of unsecured loans of Rs. 30,00,000/- and Rs. 12,10,000....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idential house, whereas physical existence of the residential building establishes beyond any doubt that a residential house has been constructed and is supported by various related documents. 2b. That, the ld. revenue authorities further erred in law in disallowing deduction of Rs.43,36,221/- u/s.54F when sale of immovable properties for Rs.45 lakhs has not been disputed and necessary details of investment for construction of a new residential house, bills/ vouchers etc. have been filed fulfilling the criteria of sec.54F of the Act. 2c. That, the ld. revenue authorities erred in not considering that the subsequent denial of any transaction by two of the parties in response to notice u/s. 133(6) was for extraneous reasons,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the case are that the assessee is an individual and NIL income declared in the e-return filed on 30.11.2014. Case selected for scrutiny followed by serving of notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, ld. AO confronted the assessee to explain the unexplained loan of Rs. 42,10,000/- which was received from Arun Kumar Bhowmik - Rs. 12,10,000/- and Bandana Bera Bhowmik - Rs. 30,00,000/-. Certain details were filed but they were not sufficient to satisfy ld. AO as the alleged cash creditors has meagre source of income. Ld. AO has denied the claim u/s 54F of the Act for want of necessary evidence to prove that the assessee had incurred the expenditure for building construction. Income assessed at Rs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No return filed No return filed 2008-09 99320/- No return filed 2009-10 135550/- 165110/- 2010-11 156380/- 178500/- 2011-12 No return filed No return filed 2012-13 136094/- No return filed 2013-14 No return filed No return filed 2014-15 No return filed 256500/- 2015-16 No return filed No return filed Total income declared till A.Y.14-15 391250/- 600110/- 10. The above details of income tax return clearly shows that the cash creditors did not have sufficient source of income to give the loan of the size of 42,10,000/- to the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) has also given finding that Mr. Arun Kumar Bhowmik deposited the cash amount of Rs. 10,10,000/- immediately befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, were from far off places for which fabrication of bills cannot be ruled out. The AO further observed that such materials were available at Haldia at competitive rates due to the presence of Haldia Port, Indian Oil Corp, Exide Industries and others. As the appellant could not fully discharge his onus to prove that there was construction of a residential house and the expenses claimed to have been incurred for such purposes were not supported by proper documentary evidences I do not find any infirmity on the part of the AO in disallowing the claim of the appellant made u/s 54F of the Act. This ground stands dismissed." 12. On perusal of the above finding of ld. CIT(A) which remained uncontroverted from the assessee's side by placing any....