Galaxy Buildcon Vs ITO (ITAT Raipur)
Summary: This appeal by Galaxy Buildcon related to Assessment Year 2015-16 and challenged the order dated 30.01.2026 passed by the CIT(A), Raipur-3. There was a delay of nine days in filing the appeal. The assessee explained that its father was seriously ill and it was occupied in attending him. Considering the explanation and the principle that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, the Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. In doing so, it referred to Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., 167 ITR 471 (SC), and Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 339.
The assessee was a partnership firm engaged in the construction business. It filed its return of income on 22.03.2016 declaring total income at Nil. The firm had been constituted on 31.10.2014 with four partners who introduced capital in the form of land or cash. The total capital introduction claimed was Rs. 3,81,33,000/-. Khushi Kundani introduced Rs. 51 lakh, Liyakat Baig Rs. 2.17 crore, Vijay Nagpure Rs. 55 lakh and Sunil Sahu Rs. 58.33 lakh. Their respective shares were 20.40%, 32%, 20.40% and 27.20%.
During assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer examined the sources of the partners’ capital contributions. The capital contributions of Sunil Sahu of Rs. 58.33 lakh and Vijay Nagpure of Rs. 55 lakh were accepted. However, the contributions of Khushi Kundani and Liyakat Baig were not accepted in full. In the case of Khushi Kundani, the AO noted that about Rs. 20 lakh out of the Rs. 51 lakh contribution had been invested after immediate cash deposits in his bank account and that his creditworthiness was not satisfactorily explained from the balance sheet and Profit & Loss statement of R.S. Automobile, his proprietary concern, for F.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15.
