The Pune bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) directs readjudication on account of failure to substantiate genuineness of source of investment with respect to purchase of immovable property
The assessee Siddikha M. Pathan along with three others purchased an immovable property for a total consideration of Rs.1.00 crore, in which all the four persons had equal share. The assessee’s share in the investment towards the purchase of property inclusive of stamp duty and registration fees etc. came to Rs.28,25,000/-. The assessee did not furnish any return of income u/s.139 of the Act.
The AO issued notice u/s.148 and required the assessee to substantiate the evidence of source of investment made. The assessee remained absent, which led to the passing of the ex parte order u/s.144 making addition of Rs.28,25,000/- towards unexplained investment
Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal. Thereafter the assesse filed another appeal before the tribunal.
It was observed by the tribunal that the assessee submitted partial evidence of sources of the investment, claimed to have obtained from his two sons and the amount received as per Tharav Patra along with cash available.
Further the assessment order was passed ex parte under Section 144 of Income Tax Act and the assessee could not properly substantiate the genuineness of the source of investment fully during the remand proceedings as well.
After observing the submissions of both parties the single -member bench Of R.S. Syal, ( Vice President ) directs readjudication on account of failure to substantiate genuineness of source of investment with respect to purchase of immovable property .
Bhuvanesh V. Kankani counsel appeared for assessee and Sourabh Nayak , counsel appeared for revenue.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
