Chanda Singh Vs ACIT (ITAT Patna)
Books Not Mandatory for Sec. 69, But Proof Essential – Property Purchase Cash Portion Disputed – ITAT Patna Remands for Seller Cross-Examination
Patna Tribunal considered whether addition u/s 69 for unexplained investment could stand when Assessee was not required to maintain books of account.
Assessee, wife of Shri Uma Kant Singh of the Uma Kant Singh Group, was subjected to proceedings u/s 153C following search & seizure operations on the group. During post-search inquiry, it was found that she had invested ₹38,15,000 in a property in FY 2018-19, out of which ₹17,51,000 was in cash. AO accepted ₹21,00,000 paid through bank from her husband but treated the cash portion as unexplained investment u/s 69, taxable u/s 115BBE, and also initiated penalty u/s 271AAC.
Before CIT(A), Assessee argued that she was not obliged to maintain books of account as she was deriving income from other sources below taxable limits, & hence section 69 could not apply. She further contended that the cash payments were not made in FY 2018-19 but represented advances given to the sellers between 2010 & 2013, supported by acknowledgment letters. CIT(A) rejected these arguments holding that even if books were not required, Assessee was bound to explain the source of cash investment. As no valid documents were furnished, the addition was confirmed.
