TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 to 58 of the paper book). The Collector has clearly held that upon Inspector of adjoining area that though registered sale deeds were executed on the collector rate but the same was less than the prevalent market rate. This clearly shows that the assessee was taken for a ride and the cash portion paid to the assessee by the buyer was not declared and whatever steps the assessee could have taken, have been taken by the assessee to report the matter to the authorities. The cash has been received by the assessee on sale of agricultural land and the same has been deposited in the bank. - Source proved - No addition. - ITA No. 595/Chd/2011 - - - Dated:- 23-8-2013 - Shri T. R. Sood, A.M And Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Sudhir Sehgal For the Respondent : Shri Akhilesh Gupta ORDER Per T. R. Sood, A. M. This appeal is directed against the order dated 11.5.2011 of the ld. CIT(A), Panchkula. 2 In this appeal the assessee has raised the following grounds which are as under: 1 That the Worthy Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Panchkula has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 28,20,000/- as made by the Assessing Officer, as unexplained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ale consideration. In this background the Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the assessee has no source for the deposit of Rs. 28,20,000/- in cash in the bank and same was added to the bank of the assessee. 4 On appeal similar submissions were made before the ld. CIT(A). Copies of agreements were again submitted and it was submitted that the assessee has received cash and cheques in the presence of one Shri Ved Parkash whose affidavit was also filed. The details furnished before the ld. CIT(A) are as under: Particulars Cash Cheque Agreement No. 3 dated 28.09.07 Rs. 1,00,000/- NIL Agreement No. 1 dated 28.09.07 Rs. 4,00,000/- 5,00,000/- Agreement No. 1 dated 21.12.07 Rs. 5,00,000/- NIL Agreement No. 2 dated 07.01.08 (*) Rs. 25,78,875/- 12,50,000/- 3,50,000/- (*) Total cash as per agreement No. 2 is Rs. 38,28,875/- Less: Cash already received vide agreem ent no. 1 i) Dated 28.09.07 4,00,000/- ii) Dated 21.12.07 5,00,000/- Rs. 9,00,000/- iii) Cheque received on 07.01.08 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is buyer and the account clearly shows total paym ent consisting of Rs. 5 lakhs, Rs. 3,50,000/- and Rs. 12,50,000/- on 10.10.2007, 8.10.2008 and 8.10.2008. In fact some of the currency notes were in bad form and the same was returned and the buyer had issued another cheque for Rs. 3,50,000/-. If the sale consideration was only Rs. 17,50,000/- then why the buyer paid another cheque of Rs. 3,50,000/- in addition to the cheques for Rs. 17,50,000/-. Further Shri Ved Parkash was witness in all the sale agreements and he has clearly stated on affidavit that Smt. Kulwant Gupta has made payment of Rs. 55,78,875/-. The assessee had filed return and the computation (copy of which is available at page 1 of the paper book) clearly contain the note to the effect that the assessee has received sale proceeds of Rs. 55,78,875/- against sale proceeds of rural agricultural land. All these facts clearly show that total consideration was Rs. 55,778,875/-. 6 In any case the assessee had filed a complaint with the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax explaining these details and a request to take action against Smt. Kulwant Gupta against the Economic Offence by showing lower consideration and similar compla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d for the total consideration of Rs. 56,78,751/- out of which Rs. 5 lakh and Rs. 12,50,000/- was received vide cheque no. 004473 dated 29.9.2007 and cheque No. 004480 dated 7.1.2008. It is further stated that in this agreement a sum of Rs. 38,28,875/- was paid in cash. This agreement clearly shows that total consideration of Rs. 56,78,751/- out of which Rs. 38,28,875/- was paid in cash. However, the buyer very smartly got an Power of Attorney executed simultaneously along with this agreement (translated copy of which is available at page 44 to 47 of the paper book) through which Smt. Pushap Lata, i.e. the assessee has appointed one Shri Ravinder Kumar as attorney holder. Shri Ravinder Kumar executed the sale deed (copy of which is available at pages 23 to 25 of the paper book) for the sale of said land to Smt. Kulwant Gupta (i.e. the buyer) on 8.01.2008. In this sale deed total consideration shown is Rs. 17,50,000/-. Since this sale deed was not executed by the assessee she can not be said to have the knowledge that the sale deed was executed only for Rs. 17,50,000/-. No fault can be found with the issue of Power of Attorney which was executed in favour of Shri Ravinder Kumar only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
