Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (5) TMI 486 - AT - Income TaxAssessment u/s 153A - Documents recovered from the laptop - presumption - Addition of commission - HELD THAT:- If there is income element in the documents seized form the possession of the assessee, then there was no requirement of bringing any corroborative material on record. However, there has to be existence of income in the documents seized. If the documents seized does not show any income earned by the assessee, then ld AO cannot rest on provision of section 292C without bringing any corroborative material on record. AO did not examine buyers of the property with respect to the commission paid by them to the assessee. Even assessee was also not questioned during the course of search with respect to these three letters. As we have already held that there is no income accrues to the assessee based on these three documents, without bringing any corroborative material, it could not have been taxed in the hands of the assessee. While confirming the addition, ld CIT (A) was of the view that TIDCO has won bid for the property in 2006 for ₹ 117 crores, TIDCO sold that property in 2010, therefore, market value of the property would have gone up to ₹ 200 -300 crores and assessee therefore would have received the commission. Sale deed of the property shows consideration of ₹ 122 Crores only. There was no corroboration of the valuation presumed by the dl CIT (A). He did not bring on record even the circle rate of the property to show that market value of the property has increased so much. Alleged commission was only ₹ 17.50 Crores. Had the property price would have gone up by (assuming at the lowest estimate of ld CIT (A) of ₹ 200 crores then the property is appreciated by ₹ 83 Crores ( ₹ 200 -117 ) Crores. Had the appreciation been so much, nobody would have forgone the profit of ₹ 83 Crores for ₹ 17.50 Crors. Therefore, such reason given by the CIT (A) cannot be the basis for confirming the addition. We reverse the orders of the lower authorities and direct the ld AO to delete the addition of commission income in the hands of Mr. Madhur Mittal and Mr. Sumit Mittal - Decided in favour of assessee.
|