Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Land purchase through partners’ capital contributions – ITAT Deletes Addition

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 6800
Case Name
Swastik Developers Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2017-2018
Advertisement

Swastik Developers Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)

ITAT Ahmedabad deletes additions for unexplained investment & partner’s capital in construction firm’s case

Ahmedabad ITAT has granted complete relief to a construction partnership firm by deleting additions made under Sections 69A & 68 on account of purchase & partners’ capital contribution.

Assessee had purchased l& for Rs 2.75 crore &  AO, in reassessment proceedings, treated Rs 2,91,23,300 as unexplained investment u/s 69A (including stamp duty & registration) & Rs 1,37,40,714 as unexplained cash credits u/s 68, alleging that partners had low incomes & their capital contributions were unexplained.  CIT(A) upheld the additions, holding that the firm failed to prove the genuineness & creditworthiness of the partners.

The primary issues involved in the appeal before Tribunal are :

(i) whether the addition of Rs.2,91,23,300/- made u/s 69A on account of alleged unexplained investment in l& is sustainable in the hands of the firm, &

(ii) whether the addition of Rs.1,37,40,714/- made u/s 68 in respect of capital introduced by the partners is legally tenable.

Tribunal noted that  Assessee firm was constituted during the financial year 2015–16 & had entered into a registered purchase agreement for immovable property with the total purchase consideration amounting to Rs.2.75 crore. Additionally, stamp duty & registration charges aggregating to Rs.16,73,300/- were incurred, resulting in total investment of Rs.2,91,23,300/-. Out of the total purchase price, Rs.2,02,00,000/- was paid in F.Y. 2015–16 & Rs.89,23,300/- in F.Y. 2016–17. However, the addition u/s 69A has been made for the entire amount of Rs.2.91 crore in A.Y. 2017–18, ignoring the fact that only Rs.89,23,300/- was actually paid during the relevant previous year. Tribunal opined that this approach suffers from a fundamental fallacy. The addition u/s 69A must relate to the investment or expenditure actually incurred during the year under assessment. It is a well-settled principle that no addition can be made u/s 69A for an amount not representing an investment made during the relevant previous year.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Vijayakumar Shetty
Qualification: CA in Practice
Company: Shetty & Co, Chartered Accountants, Mangalore
Location: Mangalore, Karnataka
Articles Published: 6,298

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.