2025 (8) TMI 1649

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....016 declaring total income of Rs. 15,48,730/-. Subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS under limited category on the issue of 'whether the investment and income relating to properties are duly disclosed'. Thereafter, notice under section 142(2) of the Act was issued on 03.07.2017 and duly served on the assessee through system. Notice under section 142(1) dated 22.06.2018 along with questionnaire was also served on the assessee. In the notice, the assessee was asked to furnish the copy of Conveyance Deed, if any, made during the FY 2015-16 and in response thereto, the assessee replied that she had not purchased any property during FY 2015- 16 relating to assessment year 2016-17. The assessee was asked to furnish the comp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ess amount shall be deemed as income in the hands of purchaser under the head "income from other sources", therefore, made the addition of Rs. 1,23,156/- in the hands of assessee instead of Rs. 8,14,164/-. 3.1. Regarding the addition for unexplained investment made under section 69 of the Act to the tune of Rs. 11,20,984/-, the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) observed that payment for the property amounting to Rs. 6,17,494/- was made in FY 2011-12 by the assessee and the balance amount of Rs. 5,03,490/- was paid for the property in FY 2015-16. The ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) was of the view that since section 69 applies only to investments made in the financial year immediately preceding the relevant assessment year, the payments made in FY 2011-12 ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ined the source of investment made during the year. Relief Claimed: the addition of Rs. 5,03,490 should be deleted. (3) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was vehemently wrong and unjustified in confirming the addition made by the Id. A.O. amounting to Rs. 1,23,156/- invoking the provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though the same is not applicable in the present case. Relief claimed: the addition of Rs. 1,23,156/- is unjustified and is liable to be deleted. 5. I heard both the sides. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) has confirmed the additions made by the ld. Assessing Officer for an amount of Rs. 5,03,49....