| |
| The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 3045 (Ahd-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 69
Where there was investment in the life insurance premium to the extent of Rs. 31.50 lakh and onus was upon assessee to justify the source of investments based on documentary evidence which assessee failed to furnish. As such, assessee had issued Gram Sarpunch certificates wherein the income of Rs. 20 lakhs from source of agricultural operation was declared. But, assessee had not brought any evidence suggesting that there was more income earned from the agricultural operations than the certified income of Rs. 20 lakhs. Therefore, addition Rs. 1.25 lakh sustained by CIT(A) was justified.
|
Income from undisclosed sources - Addition under section 69 - Unexplained investments -
Assessee earned income by way of commission from Bajaj Allianze Life Insurance Company and agricultural operations. Assessee in the year under consideration along with his brother and wife made payment of insurance premium to the Bajaj Allianze Life Insurance Company for an amount of Rs. 31.5 lakhs only. On question by AO, about the source of investment in LIC, assessee contended that he had generated fund in the manner as detailed under :-- (i) Commission from the Bajaj Allianze to the tune of Rs. 11,01,500 (ii) Loan from the relatives who are also into agricultural operations, and (iii) Income from the agricultural operations. Assessee further claimed that he has huge ancestral land where agricultural operations were carried out. The assessee in support of his contention filed 7/12 extract of the lands. However, AO disregarded contention of assessee by observing that assessee had not furnished any details about loan taken from the relatives. Likewise, assessee has not furnished any details about the sales and purchases of the agricultural products. Accordingly, the AO treated the investment of 31.5 lakhs as unexplained investment under section 69. Assessee submitted that he was engaged in agricultural activity and his only source of income was from agricultural activity till the year under consideration in which he had undertaken Bajaj Alliance Agency. CIT(A) sustained addition for Rs. 12.50 lakhs out of Rs. 31.5 lakhs, instead of deleting the addition in entirety on account of unexplained investments under section 69. Held: There was investment in the life insurance premium paid by assessee and onus was upon assessee to justify the source of investments based on documentary evidence which assessee failed to furnish. As such assessee had issued Gram Sarpunch certificates wherein the income of Rs. 20 lakhs from source of agricultural operation was declared. But, assessee had not brought any evidence suggesting that there was more income earned from the agricultural operations than the certified income of Rs. 20 lakhs. Therefore, addition sustained by CIT(A) was justified.
Distinguished:CIT v. P.K. Noorjahan (1999) 237 ITR 570 (SC) : 1999 TaxPub(DT) 80 (SC) and Devjibhai Dhanjibhai Gabani (HUF) v. ITOn ITA No. 1249/Ahd/2007.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Against the assessee.
A.Y. : 2008-09
IN THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|