Dismissing the appeal of the assessee the High Court held that the AO has taken pains to summon Shri Bhati, the father-in-law of the Assessee and record his statement. Unfortunately, the statement made by the Assessee’s father-in-law was not helpful in explaining the source of payment of Rs. 23 lacs as capitation fees. Shri Bhati only explained the payment of Rs.7.18 lacs as regular fees. With there being no credible explanation offered by the Assessee for the payment made as capitation fee, the AO is justified in adding it to the Assessee’s income. Order of Tribunal is affirmed. (AY. 2013-14)
Sushil Bansal v. PCIT (2020) 115 taxmann.com 225 (Delhi) (HC) Editorial : SLP of revenue is dismissed, Sushil Bansal v. PCIT (2020) 274 Taxman 1 (SC)
S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Failure to explain source of capitation fee paid to a medical college for admission of son-Addition is held to be justified.