2025 (10) TMI 513

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 19-12-2018. The grounds taken by the revenue read as under: - 1. The order of the ld CIT(A) is contrary to law and facts and circumstances of the case. 2.1 The ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, assessing in the hands of the assessee as income from other sources, the value of the property purchased in the name of the assessee through the alleged loan from the firm where she is the partner. 2.2 The ld CIT(A) ought to have noted that the claim that it is a loan transaction between the firm and the assessee is not reflected in the balance sheet of the firm and that neither the capital account nor th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The assessee has expired on 31-12-2020. Shri A.S. Ashwin Kumar act as legal representative for deceased assessee. 3. Assessment Proceedings 3.1 An assessment was framed against the assessee u/s 143(3) wherein income was determined at Rs. 7.10 Lacs as against returned income of Rs. 2.80 Lacs. The addition to total income was on account of taxation of benefit arising from purchase of property at Adyar by the assessee. The addition as made u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) was for Rs. 4.41 Lacs. On the basis of the same, an opinion was formed by Ld. AO that the property belonged to the assessee though the investment was sourced by the partnership firm M/s Krepton India Granites in which the assessee acted as a partner. Since the assessee became title h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hen the capital account of the partner would have been debited which implies that the partner's capital account should be reduced and the property would not be required to be shown in the books of the firm. However, as noted by Ld. AO, the property was shown in the books of the firm as an asset and there was no reduction in the capital account of the partner. Accordingly, it could not be concluded that the said property was either gifted or transferred without any consideration leading to impugned addition in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, the impugned addition was deleted against which the revenue is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 5. Upon perusal of documents on record, it could be seen that the ass....