Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (6) TMI 983 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 54 - Whether property was purchased by the Assessee and advance was paid, is a genuine transaction and not an arranged transaction and colourable device to avoid payment of capital gains tax as alleged by the AO in the assessment order and the remand report? - HELD THAT:- From the said documents it is clear that the Assessee had issued a legal notice through her lawyer on dated 28-01-2019 to the Seller wherein alleged to have been paid ₹ 90 Lakhs to the seller and called upon the seller to execute and register the sale deed. The Seller vide reply dated 12-02-2019 through his lawyer did not refute the acceptance of ₹ 90 lakhs and offered no objection to perform his part of agreement subject to payment of remaining sale consideration of ₹ 60 Lakhs with interest @ 24% after the grace time i.e. after 110 days of time but noting said about refund of ₹ 27 Lakhs. It is the case of the Assessee that total sale consideration was fixed @ 1.5 Crores and out of which ₹ 90 Lakhs was paid as advance amount and remaining balance to be payable was ₹ 60 Lakhs only. From the reply of the seller to the notice sent by the Assessee, it is clear that the seller was asking remaining amount of ₹ 60 Lakhs only and has not disputed the receiving of ₹ 90 Lakhs, which goes to show that question for refund of ₹ 27 Lakhs to the Assessee by the seller as observed by the Ld. Commissioner, at all does not arise and if that would have been there that certainly the seller would have raised objection qua payment of ₹ 90 Lakhs. On the basis of aforesaid considerations and analyzations, we are inclined to allow deduction of ₹ 27 Lakhs as well u/s 54. - Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed.
|