Case Law Details
Vandana Dipakbhai Parmar Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the case of Vandana Dipakbhai Parmar vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad), the Assessee challenged the addition of ₹18,19,630 made under Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The Assessing Officer (AO) had determined the total income by adding unexplained investments in immovable property (₹13,17,955) and shares (₹5,01,672). The additions were upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] as the Assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to explain the sources of these investments. Subsequently, the Assessee appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the investments were explainable and supported by relevant documents. The Tribunal observed that no substantial evidence had been presented before the CIT(A) to counter the AO’s findings. However, it noted that a proper examination of the investments could be conducted if the Assessee is given an opportunity to submit detailed documentation. The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the matter by issuing valid notices and allowing the Assessee to present evidence. It also emphasized the importance of compliance with notices and timely submission of documents by the Assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the matter to the AO for further verification.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-13 (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)” for short), dated 30.07.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.
2. The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:-“1. Addition of Rs.18,19,630/- made u/s 69 of the Act:
1.01 On the facts and circumstances of your appellant’s case and in law, the ld. AO erred in making additions made to the total income of your appellant without appreciating the fact that source of investment in land and shares is very well explainable along with relevant documents and as such can’t be considered as unexplained investments.
1.02 Your appellant prays your Honour to hold so now and direct the ld. AO to delete additions made.”
3. In this case, the assessee has not filed her return of income for the year under consideration. The assessment order has been passed by the ACIT, Circle Int. Tax, Vadodara on 22.07.2023 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Act, determining total income of the assessee at Rs.18,19,630/-, making additions on account of (i) unexplained investment in immovable property amounting to Rs.13,17,955/- and (ii) unexplained investment in shares amounting to Rs.5,01,672/.
4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer as the assessee could not produce the proof of source of investment in land and shares before him.
5. Aggrieved with the order of the ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
6. We have gone through the records before us and find that the ld. CIT(A) has affirmed the addition owing to absence of any evidences filed before him. The issue involves examination of investment in properties and shares which can be examined by the AO after issue of a valid notice to the assessee to file the details. The assessing authorities shall invoke the powers vested in them in case of non-compliance of notices issued by them.
The assessee shall furnish all the evidences before the AO without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 06.12.2024
Author Bio
