Facts of the Case
The assessee, Smt. Sita Devi of Allahabad, was
subjected to assessment proceedings by the Income Tax Officer, Range-1(4),
Allahabad. During the assessment, certain investments, assets, or monetary
amounts were identified which, according to the Assessing Officer, were not
satisfactorily explained.
Consequently, the Assessing Officer treated these
amounts as unexplained income under the relevant provisions of the Income-tax
Act, 1961 and made additions accordingly. The assessee challenged the additions
through appellate proceedings.
Issues Involved
Whether the impugned amounts or assets could be
treated as unexplained income under Sections 69/69A due to failure of the
assessee to establish the nature and source of the funds with adequate and
reliable evidence.
Petitioner’s (Assessee’s) Arguments
The assessee contended that the additions were
unwarranted and based on incorrect appreciation of facts. It was submitted that
the funds or investments had legitimate sources and that explanations along
with supporting documentation had been furnished during the assessment. The
assessee argued that the Assessing Officer had disregarded relevant evidence
and relied on assumptions.
Respondent’s (Revenue’s) Arguments
The Revenue argued that the assessee had failed to
discharge the burden of proof required under the deemed income provisions.
According to the department, the explanations provided were either unsupported
by credible evidence or insufficient to establish a genuine source. Therefore,
the Assessing Officer was justified in treating the amounts as unexplained
income.
Court Order / Findings (ITAT)
The Tribunal examined the evidence on record and
the explanations offered by the assessee. It reiterated the settled legal
principle that under Sections 69 and 69A, the burden lies on the assessee to
satisfactorily explain the nature and source of investments or money found.
Where the explanation lacks credibility or
supporting evidence, the Assessing Officer is empowered to treat the amount as
income of the assessee for the relevant year. The Tribunal adjudicated the
matter based on whether the assessee had successfully discharged this burden.
Important Clarification
The ruling emphasizes that deemed income provisions
apply when the assessee cannot provide a credible explanation regarding the
source of funds or assets. Mere statements without corroborative documentation
are insufficient to avoid additions. Proper financial records and evidence are
essential to establish legitimacy of transactions.
Link to download the order –https://itat.gov.in/public/files/upload/1582193329-SITA-182.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment