9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case and in Law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 41,00,000/- made by the A.O. on a/c. of unaccounted investment u/s.69 of the Act. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 3. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was reopened for assessment and the re-assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed vide order dated 27/12/2010, thereby the Assessing Officer (AO in short) made addition of Rs. 41 lacs on account of unexplained investment. Against the said ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.Y. 2008-09 relating to acquisition of residential house property. The details of payment made in cash to the seller are as follows: Date Amount (Rs.) 06-08-2008 90,000 07-02-2009 300,000 09-02-2009 400,000 10-02-2009 300,000 28-02-2009 145,000 Total 12,35,000 The assessee had actually purchased already constructed residential house property and not only land. But, it was disclosed that only land is purchased while property is being constructed after acquisition of land. This was an arrangement done so as to get housing loan because housing loan was not available otherwise. This can also be cross verified from the sanction letter of the Central Bank of India from where loan was taken. !t is clearly mentioned in the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erewith for your ready reference. Therefore, on the basis of the discussion held above and on the basis of facts held under, the addition made may be deleted. 1) The assessee has purchased the land along with building for Rs. 12,35,000 in F.Y. 2008-09 from Shri Amulakhbhai Patel and that property was properly disclosed in the books of account of Shri Maganbhai Bhalani (Assessee). 2) The agreement was made only of land just for the purpose of getting loan from the bank and not for evasion of tax. 3) The value of the property as per Stamp Valuation authority as on date comes to Rs. 13,500 sq. mtrs. for land along with construction and total area is 78.04 sq.mtrs. Hence, the total value of the property (land along with construction) as o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has called for the copy of bank account of following a. Shri Brijeshkumar Jarsaniya, with Bank of Baroda, Khand Bazar, Surat SB A/c.No.07390100011624. The bank statement is for the period of 09.02.2007 to 13.03.2009 and it closed on 13.03.2009. On 06.02.2009, in his account a cheque of Rs. 10,00,000/- was deposited which resulted in credit balance of Rs. 10,08,371/- but the account was debited by withdrawing cash Rs. 3,00,000/- on 07.02.2009, Rs. 4,00,000/- by self cheque on 09.02.2009 and Rs. 3,00,000/- again by self cheque on 10.02.2009 which resulted in credit balance at Rs. 4,871/- only. Thereafter, within one month i.e. on 13.03.2009, this account has been closed. b. Shri Mahanbhai G.Bhalani (The assessee) with Central Bank of Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5.13. The assessee could nto substantiate his claim by furnishing cogent evidences in the assessment proceedings. The assessee tried to state as "true" by vague reply. 5.14. Neither the seller, Shri Amulakhbhai Gatorbhai Matholia nor the assessee has shown the constructed bunglow in the return of income. 5.15. Therefore, considering all the facts and evidences/documents etc. collected during the assessment proceedings, as discussed above, the assessee has not recorded the investment of Rs. 41,00,000/- towards purchase of bunglow in his book of account as well as not disclosed the same in his return of income filed. Besides, the assessee's explanation is at all not satisfactory. Therefore, the value of the investment of Rs. 41,00,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 's observations contained in paras-5.10 to 5.15 of the assessment order. We find that the AO has given a finding in para-5.12 of his order that the assessee had purchased fully constructed bungalow from Shri Amulakhbhai Gatorbhai Matholia on 31/03/2008. However, the AO proceeded to make addition of Rs. 41 lacs treating the investment made in the Financial Year(FY) relevant to Assessment Year under appeal. If the finding of the AO is correct that the sale-deed was executed on 31/03/2008 for consideration of Rs. 41 lacs, in that event, the transaction was made during FY 2007-08 relevant to AY 2008-09. It is the contention of the assessee is that he had obtained bank loan of Rs. 10 lacs on 03/02/2009. The assessment is based solely on the basi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
