New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (7) TMI 412 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

2015 (7) TMI 412 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT - TMI - Refund/ forfeiture of advance amount - Appellant unable to produce necessary facts during proceedings - Held that:- It is important to note that in the remand report the AO himself stated that the appellant was probably unable to adduce all the facts due to shortage of time in the original assessment proceedings. We are inclined to accept Mr. Alok Mittal’s alternate submission on behalf of the appellant that in view thereof the appellant mus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the CIT (Appeals) to reconsider the issue in this regard alone. It will be open to the CIT (Appeals) to seek a remand report from the AO pertaining to the facts in this regard. The appellant will be entitled to adduce additional evidence in this regard including of the respective proposed purchasers and proposed sellers under the said three transactions. - Matter remanded back. - ITA-272-2014 - Dated:- 1-7-2015 - S.J. Vazifdar, Acting Chief Justice .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of law:- Whether in fact and circumstances of the case, the addition of ₹ 20 lacs is admittedly based on presumption in view of the remand report of the AO and against the material placed on record is sustainable in the eyes of law? 3. In view of the order we intend passing, it is not necessary to consider the other questions of law raised in paragraph 7 at this stage. They are kept open in the event of it being necessary for the appellant to raise the same in any further challenge pursua .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of ₹ 3.75 lacs per marla. Under this agreement, the appellant received ₹ 20 lacs in advance by cash. On the same date i.e. 29.09.2006, the appellant entered into an agreement (the third transaction) with one Jatinder Kumar for the purchase of 10 marlas 45 sq. ft. at the rate of ₹ 13 lacs per marla and in respect thereof the appellant paid an advance of ₹ 20 lacs in cash. 5. The appellant s case is that the above three transactions stood cancelled and that pursuant to 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

by the said Sandeep Kumar as advance under the agreement dated 29.09.2006 and concluded that the appellant had in fact forfeited the amount. 7. The appellant challenged the assessment order before the CIT (Appeals). The CIT (Appeals) called for a remand report. It is important to note that the AO observed that the details in respect of the transactions such as the date on which the amounts were refunded may not have been furnished due to paucity of time. This is a vital fact which has persuaded .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant s case is that she utilized the amount of ₹ 20 lacs refunded under the third transaction by the said Jatinder Kumar to in turn refund the amount of ₹ 20 lacs to Sandeep Kumar under the second transaction. The appellant is obviously in possession of the facts in this regard. The onus was on the appellant to establish the same. To reiterate, it is the appellant s case that the amount received under the third transaction was utilized to in turn refund the amount to Sandeep Ku .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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