AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1648
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....For that, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,01,00,000/- in the form of fresh capital introduction without giving due weightage to the unjustified receipt of high fresh capital to carry on of a seemingly unprospective firm and without examining the creditworthiness of the capital introducer. (2) For that, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi erred in admitting fresh evidence/ documents without allowing a reasonable opportunity to the AO in violation of Rule 46A. (3) For that, the appellant craves leave to add, delete, alter, modify, and substitute otherwise in any or all of the grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing of the appeal." 03. The first issue raised by the ld. CIT DR ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal, written submissions filed during appeal proceedings. All the grounds raised in the appeal point to the addition made invoking the provisions of section 69C of the Act. Therefore, for the sake of convenience, all the grounds are taken together for adjudication of this appeal. 5.2 The assessment was completed ex-parte in this case. The Assessing Officer (AO) took note of the facts of appellant's non-compliances to the notices issued, proceeded to complete the assessment after issue of a show cause notice. As per the AO: " During the faceless assessment proceedings, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee mentioning the following facts: took note of the facts of appellant's non-compliances to the notices issued....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed expenditure and be deemed to be expenditure made by the assessee firm. The appellant reiterates that: But in this case, there was no expenditure. It was a capital receipt to the assessee firm and such capital receipt is outside the purview of section 69C of the Income Tax Act. There are two conditions for the deeming provisions of Section 69C of the Income Tax Act as detailed below : (i) There should be an expenditure; (ii) Failure to explain such expenditure In our case, there was no expenditure. It was only a capital receipt to the assessee firm. In view of the above, we request your honour to delete such unjustified and illegal additions u/s. 69C of the Income Tax Act. 5.4 The appellant explains tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant the provisions of section 69C are not applicable to its case. (b). Section 69C envisages that: "69C. 2 Unexplained expenditure, etc. Where in any financial year an assessee has incurred any expenditure and he offers no explanation about the source of such expenditure or part thereof, or the explanation, if any, offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the amount covered by such expenditure or part thereof, as the case may be, may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year.] (c). The appellant reiterates that it is only a capital receipt by banking channels from M/s. Tiru Fine Residency by way of Cheques - all drawn on 2nd February in 2018- and not involving e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8.01.2021, 01.03.2021, and 12.03.2021 and made an addition of Rs. 7,01,00,000/- on account of unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act in the order dated 21.04.2021. We note that the period during which the assessee was allowed opportunities by the ld. AO file during the co-vid pandemic and accordingly, no representation could be made before the ld. AO and before the ld. CIT (A) filed all the evidences qua the capital introduced during the year. The details are given in para 3.5 of the appellate, which is reproduced as under:- "3.5 Brief details of capital as on 31.03.2018 was as follows: Opening balance as an 01.04.2017 Rs 1,00,000/- Introduction of capital by Mr. Govind Garg, Designated Partner during the financial year 2017-18....