TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2003-04 2. This appeal by assessee directed against order of CIT(A) dated 24.08.2010. The assessee raised the ground that CIT(A) erred in sustaining the additions of ₹ 4,81,009/- made by the A.O. with respect of the Bank deposit as unexplained investment u/s 68 of Income Tax Act. 3. The brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was conducted at the residential premises of the assessee. Consequently notice under section 153A of the Act was issued by the assessing officer. In response to the same, the assessee filed the return of income admitting 'nil' income. In course of the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer found that there are deposits in the Andhra bank account of the assessee to the extent of ₹ 4,81,009/- Out of the same the assessee had given loan of ₹ 2,00,000/- by cheque and ₹ 2,25,000/- by cash to Lahari Green Park. No explanation was filed with regard to the source of the said deposits. Similarly the assessee had received cash loan of ₹ 22,29,160/- from M/s Lahari Green Park a group concern as per the Receipts and Payments account filed and the same was utilized for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tablished either during the assessment proceeding or during the appellate proceeding. Whereas, it is submissions of the learned counsel for the assessee that all the details of the deposits were available and no proper opportunity was given to the assessee to explain the same. Under this circumstances, in view of same, addition made by the assessing officer to the extent of ₹ 4,81,009/- being the deposits in Andhra Bank is restored to the file of the assessing officer to reconsider the submissions of the assessee with a direction to the assessee to produce all the details, as required by the department to explain the sources for the deposits in the Andhra bank. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Smt. G. Venkatalakshmi ITA NO.1362/HYD/2010 AY 2004-05 6. The only issue arising out of this appeal is whether the CIT [A] is correct in sustaining the additions of ₹ 23,14,953/- made by the assessing officer with respect to the bank deposits under section 68 of the Act or not. In course of the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer, found that there are deposits in the Andhra bank account of the assessee to the extent of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore us for the directions given by the CIT [A] and whereas the department is in appeal before us for accepting the claim of the assessee for exemption under section 54 of the Act by the CIT [A]. 9. The brief facts of the case are that, in the assessment order, the AO observed that the assessee had shown long term capital gain of ₹ 3,00,91,500/- on sale of a residential house in Jubilee Hills. Out of this capital gain, the assessee had shown purchase of land for construction of a house at ₹ 2,99,52,000/- and investment in capital gains scheme account of ₹ 1,50,000/-. Accordingly, the assessee claimed the capital gain exemption on the entire amount under section 54 of the Act. The assessing officer allowed the claim of ₹ 1,50,000/- invested in Capital Gains Scheme. As regards the purchase of land for construction of the house, the assessing officer observed that the payments were made and an agreement of sale was entered on 29-10 2007. The said sale deed was registered on 15-2- 2008. Since the registration of the sale deed was after the due date for filing the return of income, the assessing officer was of the view that the assessee was not eligible for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hase of land, when the date of purchase deed is beyond the date of filing of the return of income. It is submitted that the date of registration is paramount and not the date of agreement or any other equivalent to that, for getting the benefit of exemption under section 54 of the Act. He relied on the order of the assessing officer. 12. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the assessing officer had disallowed the exemption under section 54 of the Act made by the assessee on the ground that only a sale agreement was entered on 29-10-2007 and the sale deed was registered on 15-2- 2008 after the due date of filing the return. It is the case of the department that the assessee only purchased the land for construction of the house but no evidence was produced regarding the construction of the house within the time limit which is the basic condition for allowing exemption under section 54 of the Act. On the other hand, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the entire amount of capital gain was utilized by way of investment in purchase of a plot of land. As regards construction, it is submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rty, as submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee, except some finishing making it fit for occupation. As the assessee has substantially completed all the work of construction and has invested the entire net consideration, it has to be inferred that the assessee has complied with the conditions provided under section 54 of the Act. In our considered view, as the assessee has acquired substantial domain over new house and has made substantial payment towards cost of land and construction, within a period specified under section 54 of the Act, the assessee said to have complied with the requirements for claiming the exemption under section 54 of the Act. In view of the same, we direct the assessing officer to allow the claim of the assessee. This ground in assessee appeal is allowed whereas; the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 13. Now, we will turn to the other issue in the appeal of the assessee which relates to an addition of ₹ 27,50,000/ made by the assessing officer towards cost of construction while computing the short term capital gain. In the assessment order, the assessing officer observed that during the year under consideration, the assessee had sold a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arch and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was conducted at the residential premises of the assessee. Consequently notice under section l53A of the Act was issued by the assessing officer. In response to the same, the assessee filed the return of income for the year under consideration admitting income of ₹ 19,96,929/-. In course of the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer found that, during the year under consideration, the assessee had received cash loan of ₹ 65,55,980/- and loan by cheque of ₹ 4,34,28,009/- from Lahari Green Park and Rs, 37,57,500/- from Lahari Infrastructure Ltd as per the Receipts and Payments account and the same was utilized for making various investments as per the Receipts and Payments account. The assessee was requested to file the details of the confirmation of the parties in respect of loans accepted during the year indicating the, the assessee failed to furnish the confirmation of the unsecured loans accepted during the year. Accordingly, the same was treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act and added to the returned income of the assessee. Apart from other disallowance, the assessing offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 24.96 crores which was added by the assessing officer as unexplained investment in purchase of lands, in the absence of any documentary evidence produced by the assessee substantiating the actual amount of investment made by her during the year under consideration. If required, the matter may be sent back to the file of the assessing officer for reconsideration with a direction to the assessee to substantiate her claim. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition was made solely on the basis of a sheet numbered page 210 of annexure A/LIL/PO-01/01. The said sheet prepared by a staff shows the details of land purchased by the assessee and others. The assessee further submitted that the land against the assessee's name is the total land purchased by her over a period of time and the purchases have been accounted for over the last so many years. In fact, a large portion of the same has also been sold. The assessee filed the backup papers as to how the sheet has been prepared and stated that the backup papers show that the purchases have been accounted for in the respective years of purchase and as such it does not tantamount to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Lahari Green Park and not by assessee herself and entered in its books accordingly. As such, we direct the assessing officer to examine the relevant records of the parties and decide the issue in accordance with law. However, regarding other property, we find that, on perusal of the paper book, these lands were also not purchased during the financial year 2007-08 relevant to the assessment year 2008-09 and same is falls in the earlier financial year. In view of the same, this addition of ₹ 24.96 Crores made by the assessing officer on this issue is to be deleted and he can take necessary action as per the provisions of the Act in respective assessment years as directed by the CIT(A) . Therefore, the appeal of revenue is dismissed. 21. The first effective ground of appeal by the assessee is whether the CIT [A] is right in sustaining an amount of ₹ 92,40,000/- as unexplained investments out of the land purchased. Since, we have already dealt this issue in earlier para-19-20 of this order and this ground of the assessee is allowed. 22. The next effective ground of appeal by the assessee relates to addition of ₹ 37,57,500/- being profit on sale of land. The asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessee filed date wise purchase of the ornaments but could not explain the source of the investment. The said investment also did not appear in the receipt and payment account filed by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. In view of the same, the assessing officer treated the purchase of ornaments amounting to ₹ 8,17,140/- as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act and added back to the returned income. Being aggrieved against the assessment order, the assessee went on appeal before CIT [A]. The CIT [A] confirmed the addition made by the assessing officer and hence, the assessee is in appeal before us. 26. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that as per seized material AM/CH/02 at pages 5 to 9, Smt. Swapna has bought the gold. This purchase was paid for by Shri. G. Hari Babu through cheque to M/S Shree Jewellers. The counsel taken us to the page 1 of the paper book filed. Therefore, it is submitted that the additions made by the assessing officer on this issue as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act is not correct on the facts of the case. On the other hand, the learned departmental representative relied on the orders of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 20 lakhs and the Revenue is in appeal before us with regard to deletion of addition of ₹ 48.85 lakhs made under section u/s 69 of the Act. In course of the assessment proceeding under section 153A of the Act, the assessing officer found that as per seized material at page No. 29 to 33 of A/CH/01, the assessee had purchased agricultural land in Bhanoor of 4 acres 2 guntas for a total amount of ₹ 68,85,000/- out of which cash amounting to ₹ 20 lakhs was paid. Assessee was requested to explain the source for purchase of the land. However, no reply was filed. The assessing officer observed that this transaction was not reflected in the Receipts and Payments account. Accordingly, an amount of ₹ 68,85,000/- was treated as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act and added to the returned income. On appeal, the CIT [A] held that the addition of ₹ 20 lakhs which has been paid in cash by the assessee as per the agreement of sale remains unexplained and the same needs to be added back to the income. As regards the balance amount of ₹ 48,85,000/- it has not been established by the assessing officer that the assessee had in fact purchas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in cash. Even on the last page of the agreement wherein the vendor confirmed in hand written statement that if the registration is not made within one month from this date i.e. 01-01-2006, the total amount will be forfeited. This indicates that the vendors had in fact received the advance mentioned in the agreement of sale. Being so, though the assessee has not signed the document, the payment has been made since the vendors acknowledge the receipt of the same and same to be considered as unexplained in the hands of assessee. Regarding balance of amount of ₹ 48.85 lakhs, it is not established by the assessing officer that the assessee had in fact purchased the said land in pursuance of the agreement for sale. Since, the agreement indicates that the balance amount shall be paid only after registration of the sale deed, it cannot be said that the said amount has actually passed from the buyer to the seller in the absence of the concrete evidence regarding the fact that actual sale . We also find that the department did not bring anything on record to show that the assessee in fact completed the transaction and paid the balance amount. In view of the same, part of the addition m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us for allowing the claim of the assessee for exemption under section 54 of the Act. 35. The first effective ground of appeal, both by the assessee and revenue, relates to an addition of ₹ 5,32,48,000/- being disallowance of exemption under section 54 of the Act, claimed by the assessee. On similar and identical issue, in the case of Smt. Venkatalaxmi, we have decided the issue in favour of the assessee by giving certain direction to the assessing officer and against the revenue. For the same reasoning as in para-12 of this order, we decide the issue on similar line with regard to exemption under section 54 of the Act at ₹ 5,32,48,000/- . Therefore, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed on this issue and ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. 36. The next effective ground of the assessee is relates to addition sustained by the CIT [A] towards unexplained investment of ₹ 7.32 lacs out of ₹ 22.32 lakhs made by assessing officer. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that majority of the jewellery purchases have been explained within the limited time given and no sufficient opportunity was given to the assessee to explai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss verification of the claim of advance, the sale deeds produced by the assessee was also examined. Out of around 145 plots available for sale, as per the list, the assessee had sold and registered 58 plots. From verification of these sale deeds, the claim of year-wise advance was verified there were cash receipts as well as receipts by cheques. The assessing officer after verifying the documents, submitted that the advance for assessment year 2007-08 was ₹ 2,21,72,400/-. As regards the balance of 87 plots since no material was submitted by the assessee, the advances could not be verified. Hence, addition of the balance advance of ₹ 4,30,46,085/- sustained by the CIT [A] is correct and the same is to be confirmed since the assessee failed to explain satisfactorily before the assessing officer with evidence. 40. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Undisputedly, the amount received from the prospective buyers already been shown in the balance sheet under the head current liabilities until the plot has been registered in the name of the buyer. It appears that list of persons was also given to the lower authority. Once, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was assessed at ₹ 51,00,71,084/-. Being aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the CIT [A]. The CIT [A] deleted the amount of ₹ 32.16 crores added as unexplained investment in purchase of lands, in the absence of documentary evidence produced by the assessee substantiating the actual amount of investment made by her during the under consideration. The CIT [A] also deleted the addition of ₹ 60 lacs on the ground that the receipts were not signed by the receipts. Hence, on the above deletion, the revenue is appeal before us. For other additions sustained by the CIT [A], the assessee is in appeal before us. 43. First we will take up the appeal of the revenue. The first effective ground of appeal relates to the addition of ₹ 32,16,00,000/- being unexplained investment in purchase of land. In the assessment order, the assessing officer observed that as per page No. 210 of seized document annexure A/LIL/P01/01, it was found that the assessee had purchased 134 acres of land in and around Bhanur, Nandigama, Kondakal, Sankarapalli, etc. During the assessment proceeding, the assessee was requested to furnish the details of the land purchased and the cost a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m in the presence of the assessing officer. The CIT [A] finally found that purchase of 2 acre 3.5 guntas of land at Bhanur in the financial year 2007-08 remains unexplained even in the ledger account filed by the assessee. However, we find that, on perusal of the paper book, these lands were purchased by Shri. G. Hari Babu and the same were duly reflected in the books of Shri. G. Hari Babu. In view of the same, the entire addition made by the assessing officer on this issue is deserved to be deleted. Thus, the ground raised by the revenue is dismissed and the ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 46. The next effective ground raised by the revenue relates to CIT [A] s action in deleting the addition of ₹ 60.00 lacs merely on the ground that the receipts were not signed by the recipients. The learned departmental representative also submitted that the addition was deleted on the ground that the similar addition was not made in the hands of the mother of the assessee. It is submitted that the concept of res judicata is not applicable to the income tax proceedings. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the said addition was based on the se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment based on the additions made by the assessing officer. Both parties agreed that this issue may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh consideration. In view of the same, the addition sustained by the CIT [A] to the tune of ₹ 14.70 lacs is remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh consideration after giving proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. The ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 49. The next ground of appeal by the assessee is with regard to the first appellate authority sustaining the addition of ₹ 5.49 crores as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. We find that the issue is similar and identical to the issue, which we have decided in the previous assessment year in para-40 of this, in the assessee s own case. Following the stand taken there, we direct the department to consider this amount of ₹ 5,34,61,744/- being the advance received by the assessee from the prospective customers if the sale deed is registered in subsequent assessment year. As regards the unsecured loan of ₹ 14,70,573/-, we find that no explanation has been filed by the assessee eit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, the assessing officer found that as per seized documents, A/LIL/02 the assessee had purchased land for ₹ 4,49,764/-. Similarly, as per seized documents A/LIL/01 there was purchase of land of ₹ 9,30,430/-. Apparently the assessee failed to explain the sources for these land purchases. Accordingly, the assessing officer treated these investments as unexplained and the total amount of ₹ 13,80,194/- was added to the total income. The total income was assessed at ₹ 59,59,885/-. On appeal, the CIT [A] confirmed the addition. Being aggrieved further, the assessee is in appeal before us. 52. At the outset, we find that the assessee was not given reasonable opportunity as contended by the learned counsel for the assessee. Under this circumstance, we feel it proper to send this matter to the file of the assessing officer for fresh consideration after giving proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. We direct accordingly. In the result, both the grounds of appeal by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Shri. G. Sanjay Chowdary Assessee s appeal in ITA No. 463/HYD/2011 AY 2004-05 Revenue s Appeal in ITA No. 761/HYD/2011 A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unexplained investment in purchase of lands. Hence, the revenue is in appeal before us and whereas the assessee is in appeal before us for the additions sustained by the first appellate authority. 54. The first effective ground of appeal by the assessee relates to the addition of Rs,40,05,320/- which consists of deposit of ₹ 6,13,025/- in Axis Bank and ₹ 33,92,295/- in Andhra Bank. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the deposits made in the bank accounts are nothing but advances received for sale of plot at Suraram which was sold in the assessment year 2007- 08 and the income offered thereon and some salary received from LIPL etc. At the outset, we find that the assessee was not given reasonable opportunity as contended by the learned counsel for the assessee. Under this circumstance, we feel it proper to send this matter to the file of the assessing officer for fresh consideration after giving proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. We direct accordingly. In the result, both the grounds of appeal by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. The appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 55. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act. Aggrieved further, the assessee and revenue are in appeal before us for the additions sustained by the CIT [A] in respect of unexplained cash credits and additions deleted by the CIT [A] in respect of unexplained investment in purchase of land respectively. 57. We find that the CIT [A] sustained the addition of ₹ 4,32,855/- as the assessee was not able to substantiate the entries in the bank accounts. Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee prayed for an opportunity to explain the sources of the aforesaid deposits. In view of the same, since the assessee has failed to substantiate the deposits made in the Axis Bank as well as Andhra Bank, the addition of ₹ 4,32,855/- sustained by the CIT [A] being the deposits in the bank accounts before the lower authorities, as proper opportunity has not been given, we feel appropriate to remit back the issue to to the file of the AO for fresh consideration. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 58. The effective ground of appeal by the revenue is raised by the revenue relates to the addition made by assessing offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition of ₹ 11,44,583/-. On appeal, the CIT [A] confirmed the additions of ₹ 1,04,040/-[not ₹ 10,41,184/] and ₹ 55,12,817/- being the unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Act. Likewise, he sustained the addition of ₹ 11,44,583/- being the profit on sale of plots. Aggrieved further, the assessee is in appeal before us. 61. We find that the deposits in Axis Bonk of ₹ 1,04,040/-, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the total credit comes to ₹ 1,04,040/- and not ₹ 10,41,184/- as mentioned by the assessing officer, was not properly explained either before assessing authorities or before us. In view of the same, we confirm this addition of ₹ 1,04,040/- For balance amount of ₹ 55,12,817/-, since both parties agreed, we remit this matter back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh consideration after giving proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Thus, the ground raised on this issue is partly allowed for statistical purpose. 62. The next effective ground of appeal relates to profit on sale of plot in Bhanur amounting to ₹ 11,44,583/-. The learned counsel for the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee had shown receipt of cash loan of ₹ 1,18,80,691/- and loan by cheque of Rs,88,06,500/- from Lahari Green Park as per Receipts and Payments Account, The assessing officer observed that the deposits in Axis Bank were not appearing in Receipts and Payments Account. In spite of sufficient time and opportunity granted by the assessing officer, the assessee could not furnish source of the deposits nor confirmation from Lahari Green Park. In view of the same, the assessing officer treated these deposits amounting to a total of ₹ 2,25,81,135/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. This apart, the assessing officer found that as per seized documents A/LIL/PO- 1/01 page No.210, the assessee had purchased 142 acres of land in and around Bhanur, Nandigam, Patiganpur, Kondakal, Sankarapalli etc. The assessee was requested to furnish the details of land purchased, cost of the land purchased and source for the same. The assessee failed to furnish the details. Accordingly, the assessing officer treated the entire purchase of land as unexplained investment. Taking the prevailing market rate at ₹ 24 lakhs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n ITA No. 700/Hyd/2011 for A.Y. 2002-03 68. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was conducted at the residential premises of the assessee on 19-02- 2008. Consequently notices under section l53A of the Act were issued by the assessing officer in response to which the assessee filed the return of income for the years under consideration admitting total income for the assessment year 2002-03 for ₹ 41,053/- In course of the assessment proceeding the assessing officer found that the assessee had shown receipts from agriculture and expenditure on agriculture. However, no evidence in the form of expenditure made for tilling, cultivation etc was produced for the said agricultural operation. Similarly, the assessee had not produced any receipt for the agricultural Income. Accordingly, the assessing officer treated the income from agricultural receipts shown in the Receipts and Payment Account as income from other sources and added back the same to the total income. This apart, the AO found that for the AY 2002-03 the assessee had shown receipt of gift worth ₹ 2,70,106/- on the occasion of marriage and other advances of ₹ 1,19,000/- as per the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he totality facts and circumstances of this issue, we inclined to delete this addition. In the result, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed. Shri. C. Harish - ITA No. 668/Hyd/2011 for A.Y. 2003-04 71. The only effective ground of appeal by the assessee is relates to sustaining the addition of agriculture income as income from other source by the CIT (A). We find that, on similar and identical issue, we have decided the matter in favour of the assessee in the assessee s own case at para 70 of this order. For the reasons narrated there under, we allow the ground of appeal raised by the assessee. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Shri. C. Harish - ITA No. 701/Hyd/2011 for A.Y. 2004-05 72. The first effective ground of the appeal relates to addition towards agriculture income. We find that, on similar and identical issue, we have decided the matter in favour of the assessee in the assessee s own case at para 70 of this order. For the reasons narrated there under, we allow the ground of appeal raised by the assessee. 73. The next effective ground of appeal by the assessee relates to unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f opportunity given, no proper explanation was filed by the assessee. The said expenditures were also not reflected in the Receipts and Payment account. The assessing officer, therefore, added the entire amount of ₹ 4,47,588/- treating the same as unexplained expenditure. Even before us, no proper explanations were offered to prove that these expenditures were explained. In view of the same, we reject the claim of the assessee with regard to foreign tour expenses and purchase of paintings. The ground of appeal by the assessee on this issue is dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. Shri. C. Harish Assessee s appeal in ITA No. 670/Hyd/2011 for the assessment year 2007-08 76. The only effective ground of appeal by the assessee is relates to sustaining the addition of agriculture income as income from other source by the CIT (A). We find that, on similar and identical issue, we have decided the matter in favour of the assessee in the assessee s own case at para 70 of this order. For the reasons narrated there under, we allow the ground of appeal raised by the assessee. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. M/s. Laha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were tabulated and prepared in the form of a statement and this statement was found during the course of search proceedings. The assessee submitted that it had purchased lands from various parties and the total of such purchases had been debited to land account in the ledger, a copy of the same is filed in the paper book filed. It is submitted that it had made payments over and above the sub registrar value; however the total payment made was debited to the land account in the books of account. Referring to the seized document A/LIL/2, it was submitted that the total cost as shown at column 10 has been debited in the books of account and the difference at column No. 16 reflects the difference between the total amount paid and the sub registrar value. As the amounts have been reflected in the books of account there is no question of taking it as unaccounted purchases as has been done by the assessing officer. 79. On the other hand, the learned departmental representative submitted that, as per assessment order, the difference between the total cost of land to the buyer and the cost of land as per conveyance deed is noted at column No, 16, which totals to ₹ 52,24,204/- f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee on 19-2- 2008. Consequently notices under section 153A were issued in response to which the assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2002-03 and 2003-04 declaring loss of ₹ 6,53,571/- and ₹ 40,12,376/- respectively. In course of the assessment proceeding, the assessing officer called for the details of expenditure on production of movie as claimed by the assessee. However, the assessee could not produce any books or vouchers in spite of sufficient time and opportunity granted by the assessing officer. Accordingly, the assessing officer disallowed 75% of the expenditure in the assessment year 2002-03 and the entire expenditure for the assessment year 2003-04. Similarly, the assessing officer also disallowed the creditors for expenses shown in the balance sheet of the respective years since the assessee could not file the details of creditors along with confirmation letters. On appeal, the CIT [A] confirmed the disallowance made by the assessing officer. The CIT [A] also enhanced the disallowance in respect of creditors for expenses. Aggrieved further, the assessee is in appeal before us. 82. The first common effective ground of appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment year 2002-03, the CIT [A] found that the assessee has shown sundry debtor of ₹ 21,51,950/-. As per Schedule-VI of the balance sheet for the year ending 31-3-2002, ₹ 21,51,950/- was receivable from G. Hari Babu. A cross verification was made with the balance sheet filed by Sri G. Hari Babu, loan advanced to Swapna Lahari Films Pvt Ltd is ₹ 1,13,57,150/-. This implies that Sri G. Hari Babu has paid ₹ 1,13,57,150/- to the assessee Swapna Lahari Films. Since, the same is not explained, he made the addition, by enhancing, on actual difference of ₹ 1,35,09,100/- (Rs. 1,13,57,150 plus ₹ 21,51,950). Aggrieved by the findings of the CIT [A], the assessee is in appeal before us. 86. We find merit in the arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee that the reconciliation had not taken place in the books of LGP as on 31.03.2002. Therefore, the difference arose. Over the years, the reconciliation has been done and the same was done before the date of search. We find that the department did not bring anything on record to show that there was a actual difference between the accounts of the assessee company with Shri. Haribabu. In our c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of being heard. The ground of appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. 89. In the result the appeals and are disposed of as follows: Mrs. G. Venkatalakshmi 1) ITA No. 1361/Hyd/2010 Allowed for statistical purposes. 2) ITA No. 1362/Hyd/2010 Allowed for statistical purposes. 3) ITA No. 759/Hyd/2011 Allowed. 4) ITA No. 899/Hyd/2011 Dismissed. 5) ITA No. 466/Hyd/2011 Allowed. 6) ITA No. 760/Hyd/2011 Dismissed. Mrs. C. Swapna 7) ITA No. 1315/Hyd/2010 Partly allowed 8) ITA No. 1316/Hyd/2010 Partly allowed 9) ITA No. 1317/Hyd/2010 Dismissed 10) ITA No. 1329/Hyd/2010 Dismissed 11) ITA No. 672/Hyd/2011 Partly allowed for statistical purposes. 12) ITA No. 1015/Hyd/2011 Dismissed 13) ITA No. 671/Hyd/2011 Partly allowed for statistical purposes. 14) ITA No. 1016/Hyd/2011 Dismissed. Mr. G. Sanjay Chowdary 15) ITA No. 1318/Hyd/2010 Partly allowed for statistical purposes. 16) ITA No. 463/Hyd/2011 Partly allowed for statistical purposes 17) ITA No. 761/Hyd/2011 Dismissed 18) ITA No. 464/Hyd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
