9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 575X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HI) Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal dated 9.4.2010 raising following questions for our consideration: "(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the addition of Rs.25,58,810/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Appellate Commissioner under section 69 of the Act on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned investment in purchase of land. This was done primarily on the basis of the provisions contained in section 50C of the Act. The assessee vehemently contended that such provision would not apply in case of the assessee being a purchaser. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's version making following observations: "We have considered the rival submission and the material available on record. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id more consideration as against the consideration shown in the sale-deeds. The learned CIT(A) noted that even if section 50C of the IT Act is not invoked by the AO but the AO has applied its principle. We do not agree with the findings of the learned CIT (A) because ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the cases of Jalaram & Co. and Raicha Naresh Jain (supra) have held that provisions of section 50C of the IT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommitted no error. As already noted, the assessee had purchased 4 different parcels of land for certain declared sale consideration. The Stamp Valuation Authority, however, valued the lands higher than the sale consideration indicated in the saledeeds. Assessee paid up additional stamp duty on such valuation. This by itself would not mean that the assessee made any unexplained investment. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
