PANDIT VETTRIVEL, NEW DELHI V. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 3 (4), CHENNAI

ITA 148/CHNY/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Pandit Vettrivel, the appellant, who contested the additions made to his income for the Assessment Year 2009-10 by the AO under sections 144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act. The additions included estimated rental income, unexplained cash credit from capital gains, and adjustments to professional income. The CIT(A) confirmed the rental income addition but deleted the professional income adjustment and remitted the capital gains issue back to the AO. The ITAT heard the appeal, considered the arguments and submissions from both parties, and made its decision based on the merits of the case and the evidence presented.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 134269 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Set aside
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ी वी. द ु गा राव, ाियक सद! एवं माननीय ी मनोज कु मार अ&वाल ,लेखा सद! के सम)। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.148/Chny/2020 (िनधा रण वष / As sessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Pandit Vettrivel B-272, Ground floor, B-Block Rear Flat, Greater Kailash Part I, New Delhi-110 048. बनाम / V s . ACIT Central Circle-3(4) Chennai-34. था यी ले खा सं . / जी आ इ आ र सं . / P A N / G I R N o . AJZPP- 486 1-G (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : (!"थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate)-Ld.AR !"थ कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri S. Senthil Kumaran (CIT)- Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 27-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22-09-2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH: 1. The captioned appeal of the assessee was heard along with other appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. The other appeals have separately been adjudicated by us vide ITA Nos.279/Chny/2020 & 146 & 147 /Chny/2020. The present appeal arises out of impugned order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai [CIT(A)] on 27-09- 2019 in the matter of an assessment framed by learned Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 144 r.w.s. 254 of the Act on 29-12-2016. The elaborate 2 facts of the case have already been enumerated by us in our order for earlier years. In the present appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of certain additions. 2. The Registry has noted delay of 35 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of an affidavit of the assessee. It has been submitted that the delay has accrued due to adverse medical conditions being faced by the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR has opposed the condonation of delay. However, keeping in view the period of delay and the contents of the affidavit, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. The Ld. AR advanced argument to support the case of the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR has controverted the arguments made by Ld. AR and supported the orders of lower authorities. The written submissions have also been filed by both the sides which have duly been considered by us while adjudicating the appeal. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed- off as under. Proceedings before Ld. AO 4.1 The assessee was subjected to search action on 23.08.2007. In the first round of assessment, the income was determined at Rs.30.26 Lacs. However, the assessment was set aside by Tribunal and Ld. AO was directed to make fresh assessment. 4.2 In the set aside proceedings, notice u/s 142(1) was issued directing the assessee to furnish requisite details. The assessee failed to respond to the same which led to framing of impugned assessment on the assessee. The assessee had filed statement of computation of income 3 along with ITR-4 which was taken into consideration while determining the income of the assessee. The return of income filed by the assessee was treated as non-est return. 4.3 The additions made by Ld. AO were as under: - (i) House Property Income The assessee reflected rental income of Rs.0.96 Lacs. Rejecting the same, Ld. AO estimated rental income of Rs.6 Lacs on 4 properties. Since the properties were in joint ownership, 50% of the same i.e., Rs.3 Lacs was estimated as rental income of the assessee. (ii) Capital Gain The assessee reflected capital gain of Rs.0.33 Lacs on sale of property situated at Avalpoonthurai. The property was sold for Rs.50 Lacs. In the absence of any documentary evidences forthcoming from the assessee, entire sale consideration was treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. (iii) Professional Income In the statement, the assessee reflected net professional income of Rs.1.07 Lacs. However, the claim of expenditure was disallowed and the professional income was computed at Rs.27.26 Lacs. Finally, the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.83.26 Lacs which was subject matter of challenge before Ld. CIT(A). Proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) 5. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition of rental income. The addition of professional income was deleted since there was no evidence of additional income. The issue of capital gains was remitted to Ld. AO for certain verification. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4 Our findings and Adjudication 6. We are of the opinion that estimation of higher rental income is without any basis. It is not the case of Ld. AO that the rental income was less than municipal rateable value. Therefore, this addition stands deleted. So far as the computation of capital gain is concerned, the issue has rightly been set aside to Ld. AO for verification of facts. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case before lower authorities. 7. The appeal stands partly allowed to the extent as indicated in the order. Order pronounced on 22 nd September, 2023 Sd/- Sd/- (V. DURGA RAO) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) ाियक सद!/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखासद! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे5ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :22-09-2023 DS आदेशकीVितिलिपअ&ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. !"थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु>/CIT 4. िवभागीय!ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडCफाईल/GF