TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntioned in the sale deed. In the interest of justice and fairplay, we restore this ground back to the file of AO with a direction to the AO to make enquiry so as to find out any sale consideration received by the assessee in excess of sale consideration mentioned in the sale deed. It is pertinent to mention here that as per contention of ld. AR the sale consideration received by the assessee as per the sale deed was more than the registration value determined by the sub-registrar, therefore, it is more important to bring cogent material on record for arriving at a definite conclusion with regard to the excess amount received on sale which has not been recorded in the books of account - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee) are represented by 5 brothers namely Shri Ganeshchandra A. Rakvi (the assessee), Shri Bhalchandra A. Rakvi, Shri . Vinayak A. Rakvi, and Shri Moreshwar A. Rakvi. The 5th brother Shri Ganpat A. Rakvi, expired about 20 years back and accordingly, his share of property is transferred in the names of his sons Shri Rajeev G. Rakvi and Shri Amol G. Rakvi. During the relevant assessment year the assessee has sold his share of the property along with three other co-owners namely Shri Bhalchandra A. Rakvi (HUF) Shri Vinayak A. Rakvi (HUF) , Shri Moreshwar A. Rakvi (HUF) for a total consideration of ₹ 2.66 crores to Shri Sanjay M. Punamiya of M/s. Sandhya Enterprises and M/s Sankeshwar Enterprises vide agreement dated 31.10.2005. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inayak a. Rakvi (HUF), Bhalchandra a. Rakvi (HUF) and Moreshwar A. Rakvi (HUF) have only received ₹ 2.66 crores as shown in the sale agreement dated 31.10.2005. It was submitted that beyond this, no other consideration was received either in cash or in kind. Therefore, according to the AR, the consideration in the hands of the assessee on sale of land cannot be as assessed at more than ₹ 66.50 lakhs for the computation of long term capital gain. Regarding, the higher sale price shown by Rajiv G. Rakvi (HUF) on the same land at the same point of time, the AR has submitted that the same is due to the coercive tactics resorted to by Shri Rajiv G. Rakvi and his brother Shri Arnol O. Rak.vi with the said builder. It was further submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is also clear from record that Rajiv G. Rakvi (HUF) has sold his property only 5 days prior to the sale of property or land by the assessee and its other 3 co-owners. The properties sold are the same property, the sellers are closely related parties. the buyer is also the same party, therefore, it is highly unbelievable that the sale consideration received by assessee was only at ₹ 66.50 lakhs; whereas amount received by Rajiv G. Rakhvi (HUF) for the same share of very same property was ₹ 1.10 crores. In the appeal filed before us, assessee is aggrieved for the addition of ₹ 43.50 lakhs which is the amount considered by the AO as having been received by cash over and above the sale consideration received through cheque. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is pertinent to mention here that as per contention of ld. AR the sale consideration received by the assessee as per the sale deed was more than the registration value determined by the sub-registrar, therefore, it is more important to bring cogent material on record for arriving at a definite conclusion with regard to the excess amount received on sale which has not been recorded in the books of account. We direct accordingly. 9. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the revenue s appeal i.e. ITA No.1520/M/2011, the deletion of addition of ₹ 10,13,000/- on account of sale consideration of land has been agitated by the Revenue. The CIT(A) deleted the addition by observing that in the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
