Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax-14 Versus Anil Arora

2015 (6) TMI 182 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Addition u/s 69B - ITAT deleted the addition - estimation of the market value of the property - reference to DV0 - Held that:- There is no nexus between the property in Baddi (Himachal Pradesh) and the property in Punjabi Bagh (West). There is undoubtedly no material available to even remotely reflect that consideration over and above what was shown to be paid in the registered sale deed of the West Punjabi Bagh property was made over to the seller. In these circumstances, it was not fair in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ound, as a fact, by the CIT(Appeals) that the shop had remained vacant throughout the AY. No evidence was gathered by the AO to refute the claim of the assessee to such effect or to show that rent over and above what was declared was realized. The conclusion of the CIT(Appeals) to the contrary was affirmed by ITAT in the order dated 08.08.2014. Both the said authorities have also found, on factual inquiry, that the assessee had explained the recovery during the search with the help of books of a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) challenges the order dated 08.08.2014 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT ) in appeal ITA no. 2293/Del/2011 in respect of the respondent (assessee) for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. 2. The assessee is a resident individual associated with business of Wings Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. It is stated that search and seizure action under Section 132 of the Act was carried out in the ca .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssing Officer (AO), inter alia, noted that property (admeasuring 2275.92 sq. yds.) no. 10/78, Punjabi Bagh (West), New Delhi had been purchased from Mr. Munish Sachdeva and Mr. H.K. Sachdeva by registered sale deed executed on 19.04.2007 by the assessee jointly in equal shares with his three brothers for total consideration of ₹ 3.90 crores. It was noted that while two other brothers (Mr. K.K. Arora and Mr. R.P. Arora) had paid ₹ 1.05 crores each, the assessee and his other brother h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1,93,200/- and on that basis, discounting ₹ 90 lakhs as declared, added ₹ 71,93,200/- treating it as undisclosed investment under Section 69B of the Act. 4. The AO also noted that the assessee had declared rental income only of ₹ 34,200/- for the shop at Bhagirath Place, Chandni Chowk, Delhi which had been purchased by him for ₹ 2,55,000/- a number of years ago. The AO assessed the current rental income to be ₹ 1,14,000/- on the basis of 6% of the estimated present .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hich was allowed by CIT(Appeals) by order dated 17.02.2011. The Revenue took the matter in second appeal to the ITAT but unsuccessfully. 7. The Revenue urges the following as substantial questions of law:- i. Whether the ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of Ld. CIT and passing the order without considering the facts of case and without taking into account the valuation report relied upon by the A.O. u/s 142A of the I.T. Act as an expert opinion and deleted the addition of ₹ 71,9 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ether the ITAT was justified in law in deleting the addition of ₹ 3,22,200/- made u/s 69A of the I.T. Act 1961 on account of unexplained cash found during the course of search proceedings? iv. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, findings of the ITAT are perverse? 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the Revenue, we find the contentions urged in the appeal to be wholly misplaced. It is fairly conceded (at bar) by the counsel for the Revenue that the reference to DVO for e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version