Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 973 - AT - Income TaxSuppression of sales consideration - Held that:- The AO has taken the stamp value of property as determined by the stamp valuation authority - There was made no actual verification of the carpet area of the flats in question but the same was increased/ converted into built up area in a mechanical manner on the basis of formula as reproduced above. Merely because the assessee/purchaser had to pay the stamp duty as per the departmental instructions at a higher rate on the basis of so increased saleable area calculated on the basis of above departmental instruction/formula, that itself can not be a sufficient basis for the revenue authorities to hold that the actual sale consideration of the flats was more than that was mentioned in the sale agreement, especially, in the absence of any other evidence/incriminating material brought by the Assessing Officer - it was mentioned in the agreement that the value/cost of balcony area was inclusive in the sale value of the carpet area and the said area was excluded for the purpose of calculating the carpet area, then under such circumstances, the reasonable inference can be that the cost of balcony area has been taken into consideration and embedded into, while fixing the rate of carpet area exclusive of area of balconies. The conclusions arrived at by the lower authorities are based on conjectures and surmises and not based on any plausible evidence - The burden is on the Revenue to prove that actual consideration was more than that was disclosed by the assessee, which in this case the Revenue has failed to discharge - Decided in favour of assessee. Genuineness of unsecured loan - Held that:- The assessee has submitted that the necessary details like confirmation letters from the creditors, copies of their income tax returns, ledger account etc were filed - The assessee had produced the required evidence before the Assessing Officer but the Assessing Officer failed to take notice of the same - The issue has been restored for fresh adjudication.
|