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

2016 (5) TMI 1263 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

2016 (5) TMI 1263 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT - TMI - Addition of unaccounted income based on the seized document - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that:- Addition was made by the Assessing Officer only relying upon the draft MOU which is an unsigned one. There is no other corroborative evidence brought on record either as a result of search or enquiry made by the Assessing Officer, which could establish the fact that the contents of the draft MOU were true and the MOU was in fact acted upon. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e payment being the differential amount could not have been assessed in the hands of the assessee alone. It is also a fact to take note of that the final sale deed dated 22.08.2007 in favour of DLF with regard to sale of land in dispute, does not mention about any payment being made to the assessee or his nominees. That being the case, it cannot be said that the assessee has received the amount of ₹ 13.81 crores in cash towards the sale of land merely on the basis of the draft MOU. Thus ad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erabad Bench B , Hyderabad relating to the assessment year 2008-2009. The following substantial question of law is said to be arising from the orders of the Tribunal for adjudication: In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Hon ble Tribunal (ITAT) is correct in law in upholding the deletion of addition of ₹ 13.81 crores as an unaccounted income of the respondent-assessee based on the seized document when the said document was reflected in the final document of registration .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

naccounted income based on seized document i.e. Memorandum of Understanding in respect of the land transaction. When the assessee challenged the assessment order dated 31.12.2009, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), while partly allowing the appeal, directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of ₹ 1.85 crores as the seized and unsigned Memorandum of Understanding has no evidentiary value. However, on further appeal by the Department, the Tribunal, vide order dated 22.11.201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

parties and perused the material available on record including the impugned orders of the lower authorities. As can be seen from the material on record, the addition of ₹ 13.81 crores was made by the Assessing Officer only relying upon the draft MOU which is an unsigned one. There is no other corroborative evidence brought on record either as a result of search or enquiry made by the Assessing Officer, which could establish the fact that the contents of the draft MOU were true and the MOU .....

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