TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent-assessee. Moreover, two authorities under the Act have reached concurrent finding of fact and these findings not been shown to be perverse or arbitrary. The view taken by the Tribunal is a plausible view on the basis of documents and evidence led before it. Accordingly, Question No.1 does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus not entertained. Addition on amount paid to a certain 'VT' - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that:- Appeal admitted on substantial question of law at Question No.2. - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 2031 OF 2013 - - - Dated:- 16-9-2015 - M.S. SANKLECHA AND G.S. KULKARNI, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Arvind Pinto, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. S.C. Tiwari a/w Rutuja Pawar, Advocates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03.02 385 18% 2,40,00,000 45,56,000 12.12.01/04.03.02 83 18% 20,00,000 82,000 06.11.01/04.03.02 119 18% 1,60,00,000 9,39,000 13.01.01/04.03.02 416 18% 10,00,000 2,05,000 (Temporary loan amount) 10,00,000 Kundan Shah 12,23,000 Deduction on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e land deal and same had not yet been repaid by the vendor-M/ s Shakti. Consequently the above amount of ₹ 10 lakhs was also reduced from the consideration payable for the land deal. 5. The Assessing Officer did not accept the above submissions made on behalf of the respondent and proceeded to hold that the aforesaid three amounts were in fact payments made by the respondent-asseessee to the vendor viz. M/s Shakti. As payments were not found in books, the Assessing Officer treated them as paid from undisclosed sources. Consequently all the three sums were added to the taxable income. 6. In appeal, the CIT(A) held that documents indicating minute working of interest to the extent of giving break up of number of days, lend support ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indings arrived at by the CIT(A). 8. Mr. Arvind Pinto, the learned Counsel for the revenue reiterated the findings arrived at by the Assessing Officer. We find that both the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal have reached the concurrent finding of fact that the amount of ₹ 57.82 lakhs, ₹ 12 lakhs and ₹ 10 lakhs are all amounts which have gone to reduce the cost of land to the extent of interest attributable to the payment made before the due date, the brokerage charges paid on behalf of vendor and non-return of loan of ₹ 10 lakhs by the vendor-M/ s Shakti to the respondent-assessee. All these were indications of the fact that the above amounts are those for which credit has been given by vendor-M/ s Shakti to the resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
