TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (12) TMI 1749
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....India. 4. Deleting the addition u/s 69 of Rs. 11,19,980/- on account of transaction with the Indian Bank Loan account. 4 (i) While deleting the addition of Rs. 11,19,980/- the Ld. CIT(A} erred in banking upon additional evidence in form of additional loan account No. 727971104 and saving bank account No. 724715643 and admitting the same in violation of Rule 46A of I. T. Rules. 5. Violation the Rule 46A of I. T. Rules that assessee has admitted the additional evidence regarding the additional loan account No. 727971104 and saving bank account No. 724715643 of Indian Bank before the Ld. CIT(A}~ but the remand report was not called for by the Ld. CIT(A). 3. Rival contentions have been considered and records perused. During the course of scrutiny of assessment, the Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs. 69,000/- u/s 69 on the plea that the assessee was not having sufficient cash for making the fixed deposit. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition after having the following observations :- "4.3 I have considered the A.O's order as well as the appellant's submission extracted as abo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and miscellaneous items at Rs. 18,000/-) instead of Rs. 1,00,000/- as noted by the A.O. However considering the A.O.'s order as well as the appellant's submission, I do not find any justification neither in argument of the appellant by valuing the cost of land from registered valuer. Thus, in my considered view the appellant's request cannot be acceded too. It is also seen that the appellant has claimed the exemption u/s 54 as the appellant has sold a house and a consideration was split into the land price and the sale of super structure (Malba) and accordingly has sold a house, whereas the A.O. has only considered the consideration of land and ignored the sale of super structure. The A.O. since considered the sale of land has considered the claim of the appellant of exemption u/s 54F, whereas looking to the facts of the case, the claim of exemption made by the appellant u/s 54 appears to be correct, I find that the appellant has invested a sum of Rs. 11,10,337/- out of the sale proceeds towards the purchase of house at Rani Baug, Indore for a consideration of Rs. 60.20 Lacs in the name of his wife. The appellant has claimed the utilization of sale ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was obtained for purchase of shop, wherein the wife of the appellant is regularly carrying on business in the name of Anand Shree Fruits Juice. In this regard, the appellant has also filed the copy of food license of the Indore, Municipal Corporation. It is also evident that the payments in the loan account have been made by the wife of the appellant and there is no connection with the appellant in this respect. Further it is evident that during the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. did not asked any explanation from the appellant in this regard after obtaining the copy of account from the bank. I also find that the wife of the appellant is regularly filing return of income reflecting the income from the shop as well as agricultural income and out of which the payment in the loan account has been made. In view of the same, I consider it proper and appropriate to hold that Assessing Officer was not justified in making the aforesaid addition to the income of the appellant. Accordingly, the addition so made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. Thus, this ground of appeal is allowed." 9. We have considered the rival contentions and found that the loan was obtained for purch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ision of this section are attracted the learned Assessing Officer is bound to give opportunity to the assessee to explain the nature and source of its investment which in this case has not been provided by the Assessing Officer and in the case, the transaction in this account is very clear and out of Bank balances of three accounts and Since these all accounts were for the purpose of acquiring property for a short period of 7-8 Months were not reflected in Balance sheet of appellant. c) The position in this account is very clear that this is a mortgage loan account which the appellant had taken for the purpose of acquiring the house or the property and the operation in the loan account shows that the mortgage loan Rs. 10 lacs and additional loans Rs. 3 lacs. sanctioned by the bank have been transferred to the Saving Bank account and there from the cash was withdrawn by the appellant and was held as cash in hand for the purpose of purchase of any property. Since the suitable property could not be find out the appellant re-- deposited the said cash in hand in the account within period of six months. On perusal of all these three accounts it clearly shows that the d....