Om Prakash Girgaonkar Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Assessee filed an appeal against the order of NFAC which had upheld the reassessment made u/s 147 r.w.s 144. Assessee, an individual, is a non filer of return. order u/s. 148A(d) was passed wherein it was found that assessee has made a payment for purchase of immovable property & tax deducted u/s. 194IA is of Rs.124,05,708. Assessee has deposited a cash of Rs.13,05,000 in Corporation Bank & further has purchased immovable property valued at Rs.30 lakhs or more amounting to Rs.145,09,600. The total of escaped income was Rs.282,20,308.
Tribunal noted that it is the claim of Assessee that he has purchased one property. Assessee has deducted TDS on purchase consideration u/s. 194IA . Therefore, there is only one transaction of purchase of immovable property reported in TDS return as well as the Sub Registrar’s return. The same transaction is also reported by the return filed by the Sub-Registrar for the reason that the property purchased is more than Rs.30 lakhs. Therefore, assessee claims that he has purchased only one property. AO has made addition on both the amounts reported in these two different returns concerning purchase of one property. Therefore the claim of Assessee is that there is a double addition. Assessee also submitted that the amount deposited in the bank account is not unaccounted income of Assessee. The source of the transaction is the amount declared by a partnership firm under IDS, 2016 wherefrom the partners are allotted money. The same is source of cash deposit in the bank account as well as from the bank account the funds for purchase of the property were used.
