BRIJWASI REAL ESTATE,MATHURA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3)(1), MATHURA

ITA 74/AGR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Brijwasi Real Estate, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, concerning an assessment made by the Assessing Officer under sections 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The assessment, which was reopened based on information from the investigation wing, alleged that income of Rs.544.47 Lacs escaped assessment, representing investments in two immovable properties. The Assessing Officer added Rs.296.10 Lacs to the assessee's income, attributing it to unsecured loans whose source could not be proved. The CIT(A) deleted this addition due to lack of independent enquiries but made a typographical error in the amount. The Tribunal corrected this error and allowed the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126498 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAILENDER SHRIVASTAVA LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: M.M.AGARWAL; LD
• Keywords: Commissioner; Partners; Commissioner of Income Tax; Purchases; Deleted; ADIT
• Section: 148; 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.74/Agr/2024 (िनधा \u0010रणवष\u0010 / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s Brijwasi Real Estate 40/2-A, Sarswati Bhawan, Prayag Ghat, Mathura (UP). बनाम/ Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura. \u0002थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAKFB6619C (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. M.M. Agarwal, CA – Ld. AR थ कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 24-01-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 30-12-2018. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. 2. From the case records, it emerges that the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice u/s 148 on 31-03-2018 pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing. It was alleged that income of Rs.544.47 Lacs escaped assessment. The same represent investment in two immoveable properties by the firm. The assessee stated that the properties were purchased out of partners’ capital. The Ld. 2 AO noted that as on 31-03-2011, the partners’ capital was Rs.421.15 Lacs and unsecured loans were Rs.296.10 Lacs. The closing stock was shown for Rs.568.39 Lacs. The Ld. AO finally made addition u/s 68 for Rs.296.10 Lacs with respect to unsecured loans on the allegation that the nature and source thereof could not be proved by the assessee. 3. During first appeal, the assessee stated that original return of income was filed furnishing full financial statements and the same was proceeded u/s 143(1). During assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished documents with regards to contributions received from the partners in order to explain the sources of funds which were used for making investment in lands. The assessee also questioned the jurisdiction of Ld. AO by citing various judicial pronouncements. 4. The Ld. CIT(A), in para 7.3, rejected legal ground by observing that information was received from investigation wing that the assessee had purchased immoveable properties and the source of purchases required investigation. The same was sufficient enough to form belief of escapement of income. However, on merits, Ld. CIT(A) concurred that no independent enquiries were conducted by Ld. AO and the assessee was not asked to submit any details with regard to unsecured loans. Accordingly, the impugned addition was deleted. However, the Ld. CIT(A) made a typographical error and deleted the addition of Rs.269.10 Lacs as against addition of Rs.296.10 Lacs as made by Ld. AO. The same is the very grievance of the assessee. The Ld. AR has stated that the assessee preferred rectification application which is pending since a long time and hence, this appeal. 5. Considering the facts of the case, it is quite clear that there is mere typographical error in the impugned order. The Ld. AO had made addition 3 of unsecured loans for Rs.296.10 Lacs. The same had inadvertently been mentioned as Rs.269.10 Lacs in the impugned order. Therefore, we correct the same and direct Ld. AO to delete the entire impugned adition of Rs.296.10 Lacs. 6. The appeal stand allowed. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) 4ा ियक सद5 /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद5 /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 22.04.2025 आदेश की 7ितिलिप अ9ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु3/CIT 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड9फाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT AGRA "