Case Law Details
ITO Vs Bhavin Mukeshbhai Pate (ITAT Ahmedabad)
AO has made addition of 50% of the total value of the land as the appellant has not been able to explain the source of payment made in respect of purchase of land. However, it appears from the detailed submissions made by the assessee supported by the sufficient documents, particularly, the cash book of the company, namely, Iscon Proton Pvt. Ltd. showing the source of investment made for such purchase of land situated at Ambapur, Gandhinagar, with another company, namely, Chehar Realty Pvt. Ltd., which establishes the fact of purchase of land by both the companies. Merely, because the assessee’s PAN number was mentioned as he was the Director of one of the company, the purchase cannot be said to be made by him when the purchase has been shown in the P&L account by the said company itself as well as part of the closing stock of the said company, namely, Iscon Procon Pvt. Ltd. In that view of the matter, the addition made by the Ld.AO has been rightly found to be not justified and deleted by the Ld. CIT (A), which, in our considered opinion is just and proper so as to warrant interference.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 15.06.2017 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad arising out of the order dated 23.12.2016 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gandhinagar, under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2014-15.
2. The deletion of addition of Rs.2,64,88,300/- under Section 68 of the Act on account of undisclosed income is the subject matter before us.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
