| |
| The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 0770 (Jp-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 69B
Where no document or corroborative evidence was placed on record by the revenue authorities to prove that the investments made exceeded the investments shown in the books of account of the assessee, addition made under section 69B as unexplained investment was required to be deleted.
|
Income from undisclosed sources - Addition under section 69B - No corroborative evidence to prove real investments exceeded investments shown in books of account -
AO while completing the assessment under section 143(3) made an addition on account of unexplained investment under section 69B on the ground that the real investments exceed investments shown in the books of account of the assessee.Held: No document or corroborative evidence was placed on record by the revenue authorities to prove that the investments made exceeded the investments shown in the books of account of the assessee. Therefore, merely stating that the assessee made investments exceeding the amount shown in the sale deed would not fasten any liability on the assessee under section 69B. Further, in case of Naresh Khattar (HUF) (2003) 261 ITR 664 (Delhi) : 2003 TaxPub(DT) 0987 (Del-HC), Smt. Amar Kumari Surana v. CIT, (1997) 226 ITR 344 (Raj.) : 1997 TaxPub(DT) 0389 (Raj-HC), it was held that the burden is on the revenue to prove the real investments exceeding investments shown in the books of account of the assessee. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, addition made by AO was required to be deleted.
Followed:Naresh Khattar (HUF) (2003) 261 ITR 664 (Del-HC) : 2003 TaxPub(DT) 987 (Del-HC) and Smt. Amar Kumari Surana v. CIT (1997) 226 ITR 344 (Raj-HC) : 1997 TaxPub(DT) 389 (Raj-HC).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In favour of assessee.
A.Y. : 2012-13
IN THE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|