TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n under section 48, the value adopted for the payment of the stamp duty would be considered as full sale consideration received or accrued to the assessee on transfer of a capital asset. In the present case no capital gain computation is there. The assessee is a purchaser therefore deeming fiction provided under section 50C cannot be applied upon the assessee. Addition on account of accrued interest income of the assessee - Held that:- AO atleast ought to have proved that it is in the hand-writing of the assessee or of any family member. In the absence of corroborative evidence, it is quite difficult to give any categorical finding. The first onus is upon the Revenue to charge the assessee with exact details pointing out that these details relate to the assessee. No such effort was done by the AO also. Therefore, we give benefit doubt to the assessee and on the basis of such insufficient incomplete evidence, the assessee cannot be burdened with taxability. Thus additions deleted Addition on opening capital balance - Held that:- This aspect needs verification. The AO has not recorded any categorical finding on this issue. We direct the AO to verify whether the assessee has fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. Appeal decided partly in favour of assessee - IT(SS)A No. 541 AND 542/Ahd/2011, IT(SS)A No.541 AND 542/Ahd/2011, IT(SS)A No.573 and 613/Ahd/2011, - - - Dated:- 29-10-2015 - SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah For the Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, CIT-DR O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Out of the present bunch of eight appeals, six are directed at the instance of the assessee against separate orders of the ld.CIT(A) dated 01.09.2011 in the Asstt.Years 2003-04 to 2008-09 respectively. In the Asstt Year 2007-08 and 2009-10, the department is also in appeal before us. Since common issues are involved, therefore, we heard all the appeals together and deem it appropriate to dispose off them by this common order. 2. The major issues are involved in the cross appeals for the Asstt.Year 2007-08 and assessee s appeal in the Asstt.Year 2008-09. The ld.First Appellate Authority also decided the appeals of both these assessment years by way of common order. Therefore, first we take up all the appeals for the Asstt.Year 2007-08 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be deleted. 4. Such and further relief as the nature and circumstances of the case may justify. 4. Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act was carried in the group cases of Adi Avirat on 23.5.2008. Residential premises of the assessee was also subject to search on 23.5.2008. During the course of search, incriminating materials including loose paper were found. These were inventorised as annexure AS-1 to AS-9 and annexure AR-1 to AR-4. In order to give logical end to the search proceedings a notice under section 153A(a) was issued upon the assessee. In response to the notice, the assessee has filed return of income on 31.7.2010 declaring an income of ₹ 9,91,679/- and ₹ 28,69,110/- in the Asstt.Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 respectively. The AO had issued a notice under section 142 along with questionnaire upon the assessee on 21.9.2010. He further issued a fresh notice under section 143(2) alongwith a questionnaire under section 142(1) on 22.10.2010, because, the incumbent in the seat of the AO has changed. The ld.AO apart from making addition to the total income of the assessee in both the assessment y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2006 22,26,300 550,000 2/9/2006 29,00,000 22/9/2006 10,50,000 26/9/2006 25,00,000 7/10/2006 15,00,000 20/10/2006 10,19,430 7/2/2006 100,19,430 100,19,430 cash 22,26,300 cheque 122,45,730 156,58,215 122,45,730 received 34,2485 ----------- 6. While construing these pages, the ld.AO has observed that land mentioned in survey nos. available on these pages have been sold by the assessee at the rate of ₹ 9,00,000/- per vigha which is far more than the amount stated in the sale deed. The assessee had received cash components on sale of these lands, which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Others Paresh Babubhai Patel) 1232 5827 Ishwarbhai Rajkeshkumar 02.11.2007 1660695/- Jethidas Patel Rameshbhai Patel Others (POA Others Paresh Babubhai Patel) 1218 3092 Gabhaji Nathaji Jagdishbhai 18.01.2008 882000/- Thakore Others Bhagwanbhai (POA Jayendra Chandarana Mavjibhai) Others 1231 9513 Gabhaji Nathaji Rajendrabhai 01.09. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29.48 Vigha 7504620/- Survey No. Area Sq.Mtr. Name of the seller Name of the purchaser Date of Reg. Sales as per Reg. sale deed. 1244 10940 Champaben Naranbhai Others Kanubhai M. Patel Others 27/12/2006 1422200/- Survey No. Area Sq.Mtr. Name of the seller Name of the purchaser Date of Reg. Sales as per Reg. sale deed. 1215 2900 Lilaben Thakore Others Champaben Naranbhai Others 5/11/06 200000/- 1238 4481 Champaben Rajesh Patel 17/4/08 2045400/- 1241 4519 Naranbhai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... =26 vigha x ₹ 9,00,000/- = ₹ 2,34,00,000/- Value shown in sale deeds= ₹ 77,04,620/- Cash Received ₹ 1,56,95,380/- 9. Similarly, with regard to the land owned by the assessee in joint ownership along with Shri Mavjibhai Haribhai Desai, he worked out the sale consideration ought to have been received by the assessee as under: Value of the land =10.02 vigha x ₹ 9,00,000/- = ₹ 90,18,000/- Value shown in sale deeds = ₹ 30,30,400/- Cash Received ₹ 59,87,600/- 10. Identical working has been made in the Asstt.Year 2008-09 on the ground that sale deeds have been executed in the accounting period relevant to the Asstt.Year 2008-09. The working made as under: Survey No. Area Sq.Mtr. Name of seller the Name of purchaser the Date of Reg. Sales as per Reg. sale deed. 1250 7729 Champaben Naranbhai Others Kanubhai M. Patel Others 27/12/2006 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is share has been shown at ₹ 23,89,500. It may be mentioned that these two blocks namely block number 1220 and 1233 are belonging to the appellant. The appellant Has not disputed the receipt of cheque amount of ₹ 804,100 against the sale of this property. If the cheque amount of ₹ 804,100 has been received against the sale of the two blocks as per seized page number 73, then the remaining entries of the same page are also to be treated as correct. In the same page the total sale consideration of ₹ 23,89,500 in respect of these two blocks has been written against the name of the appellant under the figure of ₹ 132,68,715 being the 50% share of the appellant in block number 1250, 1243, 1251, 1212, 1238,1247, 1240, 1249 and 1244. It shows that the appellant had 50% interest in these blocks also. Even though,-these blocks are shown in the name of some other fanners, the statement of the appellant recorded on 23/5/2008 is relevant in which he had stated that though the properties has been purchased by him long back, the registration has not yet been done in some cases and in many cases the registration has' been done during the last l to 2 years. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this paper is to be presumed to have been received by the appellant. Because, the contents of the paper either are correct or incorrect. It cannot be partly correct and partly incorrect. Since the cheque amount against the. sale of the two blocks number 1220 and 1233 has not been disputed by the appellant, the cash amount shown along with the cheque amount also must have been received by him. It may be mentioned that the appellant had disowned, the transactions appearing on page number 72 and 73 of Annexure A-S5 despite the fact that the properties bearing survey .number 1244, 1220 and 1233 are standing in the joint names of the appellant and Mavjibhai H Desai and the documents were seized from his premises. In my opinion, since the same land has been sold by the appellant alongwith other lands as mentioned in these pages, it has to be presumed that these two pages are pertaining to the transactions of land sale by the appellant: 6.10. It may be mentioned that the AO has wrongly included the survey number 1215 admeasuring 2900 m2 in page number 24 of the assessment order for working out the on money (cash) received by the appellant. I have verified the seized material and f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he AO was justified in holding that the cash amount has not been passed to the seller of the properties and the amount has been retained by him. In my view, the burden of proof casted upon the appellant as per section 292C of the Income-tax Act has not been discharged by the appellant. Therefore, to the extent of the amounts shown as received as per page number 73 of Annexure A-S5, the appellant himself had received on money on the sale of the land as mentioned therein. Subject to my directions as mentioned above, in principle, the addition of on money in assessment year 2007-2008 on the basis of the seized paper is partly confirmed. As held earlier, since the working in page number 73 also include the sale of the three blocks namely 1220, 1233 and 1244 owned by the appellant, separate addition of ₹ 29,93,800 cannot be made by the AO in assessment year 2007-2008. In other words, the appellant has received total sale consideration at the rate of ₹ 9 lakh per Bigha and the appellant is assessable only in respect of that amount which is received by the appellant as appearing against his name in page number 73 of this Annexure. 7. Similarly in assessment year 2008-2009 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .72 and 73 of the AS-5, meaning thereby, that the assessee has sold these pieces of land in the capacity of owner. Once the assessee has sold the land as an owner, then any cash component received by him is to be assessed in his hand. d) The ld.AO further inferred that the assessee must have some right in these lands, and therefore, he has facilitated transfer of these lands to the builder companies. In view of his some rights, he must have retained cash component which was not given to the original land owners mentioned in the registered sale deed. Therefore, the cash component, alleged to have been received by the assessee discernible in page no.73 of the seized material, deserved to be assessed in the hands of the assessee. e) Reading page nos.72 and 73 had indicated that the land was actually sold at the rate of ₹ 9,00,000/- per vigha and cash component received at this rate after debiting the rate mentioned in the registered sale deed ought to be assessed in the hands of the assessee. f) The assessee failed to explain the details narrated on page nos.72 and 73 with plausible evidence, and therefore, these transactions are to be treated as belonging to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n blaming the assessee that the submissions made by the assessee are belated on 24.12.2010 and only six days time left for completion of the assessment order. Therefore, no inquiry should be conducted. In our opinion, it is the AO who took proceedings at a time barred stage by starting the investigation at the fag-end. Therefore, no blame can be put upon the assessee. 14. The next reason assigned by the Revenue authorities and which has ultimate bearing on the controversy is that the assessee is a trader in the land, and therefore, income from the purchase and sale of land is to be assessed as business income. On analysis of the record, we find that the assessee has shown three types of income viz. (i) agriculture income, (ii) commission income for facilitating the sale of agriculture land from the farmers, builders etc., and (iii) income from sale of land, which according to the assessee were agriculture land, therefore, it is exempt even from the capital gain tax. The ld.First Appellate Authority has dealt with these issues in para-6 on page nos.36 to 40 of the impugned order. According the ld.CIT(A), the assessee had disclosed purchase of 25 pieces of land ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this one transaction, there is no other transaction, where the assessee has got converted agriculture land into non- agriculture land and sold in the shape of plots. As far as the allegations of the CIT(A) that the assessee has sold three pieces of land, it is pertinent to note that, one piece of land was purchased by the assessee on 5.9.1997 i.e. almost more than nine years from its sale. How, on the basis of this isolated transactions, the assessee can be termed as the trader in the land ? 16. The ld.DR, on the other hand, contended that it is not isolated transactions which are considered by the Revenue authorities. Huge investment made by the assessee in purchase of agriculture land in the last 15 years would indicate that he was carrying out this activity in an organized manner. He has facilitated a number of persons to sell their lands to the builders. Thus, apart from being broker in land dealings, he has traded in land at his own. He relied upon the orders of the Revenue authorities below. 17. We have considered rival contentions. Before we embark upon an inquiry on the facts of the present case so as to find whether the assessee is to be termed as involved in tradin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the magnitude of the transaction, bearing reasonable proposition to the strength of holding then an inference can readily be drawn that the activity is in the nature of business. 18. If we visualize the facts of the present case in the light of the above, then it would reveal that the assessee has disclosed purchase of agriculture land either in his name or in his family members names. These details are contained in reply to question no.6 of the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act. A perusal of these details would indicate that all the lands have been retained by the assessee. He has never resold, though, except one piece. So there is no repetition of the transaction. The assessee has sold three pieces of land which were jointly held along with Shri Mavjibhai Haribhai Desai. Both these persons were owner in equal share of these three pieces of land. This land is admeasuring 10.02 vigha. One piece of land is acquired in September, 1997, meaning thereby, the land was retained by the assessee for more than nine years. The ld.CIT(A) has made reference to the stamp duty valuation authority as per details at page no.37. But we failed to understand how the differenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue is that on perusal of these pages would indicate that the land in the survey numbers mentioned were sold. The actual sale consideration was received at the rate of ₹ 9 lakhs which is more than the amount stated in the sale deed. The assessee has disclosed in his statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, in reply to question no.6 that he has purchased the property in the past, whose documents were registered recently. A reference to this can be made to serial nos.10, 14, 17 and 21 to the property mentioned in reply to question no.6. Thus, according to the AO, once the assessee is in the habit of settling the purchase of land, whose documents can be executed subsequently, would indicate that the assessee must have purchased these pieces of land on power of attorney from the original land owners. When these lands were sold, he has received the purchase price at the rate of ₹ 9,00,000/- per vigha. The amounts stated in the sale deed have been given to the original land owners and the cash component has been retained by the assessee. 20. The ld.AO has made discussion about the rights devolved upon any persons who is holding power of attorney, and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 108 are found which have been seized which are having page no. 1 to 108. You check it one by one. I am showing. Serial wise explain the same. A.28. After having seen the aforesaid File NO. AS-5 page no. 1 to 108 in detail,! want to state that all the papers are in respect of the business of purchase/sale of land for which at present not able to explain because my evidence books are lying with my advocate/accountant and my mental and physical condition is not good and, therefore, not able to give answer. . Statement under section 132(4)/131 dated 12.6.2008 Q.3 In the work of land broker, with whom and in respect of which land, brokerage of land has been received? State. A.3 In the business of land brokerage, land of village Moti Bhoyan Block No. 1200 series about 30-40 vighas of Rajendrabhai Bhalabhai patel and Mavjibhai Haribhai Desai and Palakbhai Pareshbhai Patel was sold to Anilbhai Shakarabhai Patel.Ranipwala, price whereof as per document approximately was ₹ 2,00,000.00 per VIgha (Rs.two lakhs only) wherein I had received brokerage at the rate of Vs % and uptil now, towards brokerage, I have received Rs, 1,50,000.00 (Rs. one lakh fifty thousand on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 250-7729 1243-4043 1251-13200 1212- 14865 1239- 3449 1247-4043 1240-3805 1249-6540 1244-10940 ------------ 68614 divided by 29.48 vigha x 9,00,000.00=2,65,37,430 Remaining/pending: 1242-5827 1246-1243:5827 1241: 4519 1238:4481=20654 and half thereof would be 10327 Cheque 1422200 Block 1215 = 0.29.00 - Block 1245 = 0.06.00 Pareshbhai 13268715/- 2389500/- 15658215/- 1220-6540 1233-5827 12357 divided by 5.31 vigha 47,82,600 x 900000 Cheque 804100 4779000 cheque 1422200 2226300. 2 Pareshhai-2389500 2389500 See to it and explain about the details written therein. A.14 Aforesaid page no. 73 is part of loose paper file AS/5 which I have read absolutely in peaceful manner and the details written therein and stated in this question are similar. Having seen said page no. 73, I -am stating that the lands of block numbers stated In this page of village Moti Bhoyan, agricultural lands of block no. 1220 and 1233 were sold as land broker to Anilbhal Shakarabhal Patel. As regards other details except this, for lack of complete knowledge at present with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e may be an understanding between two individuals for a transfer of land and documentation might have been registered later on, but then the legal title would vests in the original owner unless and until the transfer has taken place by way of registration of sale deed and by effecting mutation or change of ownership in the land record. The fallacy in the approach of the AO would be analyzed with different angle also. If the assessee has any right in the land qua which the Revenue failed to lay his hand, then also no vendee would purchase the land unless some rights, if any available and discernible from the revenue record are being assigned by that third person. In other words, the assessee would have signed the sale deed as an assignee of his right embedded in this land by virtue of some understanding between the farmers. This fact can be assigned by record of these original land owners. It is also pertinent to note that if the assessee has purchased the land in the past, and therefore, documentation has been executed directly in the name of person mentioned by the assessee i.e. representative of the builder, then whole sale consideration would have come to the assessee and not th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers during these assessment years. As far as this inference is drawn, there is no error at end of the Revenue authorities, because, this fact has been approved with the help of sale deed produced by the assessee that these survey numbers have been transferred; ii) Second inference drawn by the AO is that the assessee in his statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act on date of search has replied that he has purchased some of the properties five-ten years back and the document has been executed recently. A reference to the reply of the assessee qua question no.6 and property mentioned at serial no10, 14, 17 and 21 can be made. On the basis of this reply, the ld.AO assumed that the assessee must have purchased these lands and he has transferred the land at the rate of ₹ 9,00,000/- per vigha, which is far more than the sale consideration stated in the sale deed. The difference between the amounts stated in the sale deed and calculated at the rate of ₹ 9,00,000/- deserve to be treated as income of the assessee. In our opinion, the evidence for arriving this assumption is not available on record. The properties which have been purchased by the assessee about 10- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee to explain the documents. In these documents three survey numbers were held by the assessee jointly, which has also been transferred. Meaning thereby, the assessee has information about the noting in the documents. Therefore, he is required to explain the pages. But to our mind, the assessee has successfully discharged his onus. He has filed the copies of land revenue record, copies of the sale deed, details of cheque vide which payment was made by the vendee to the vendor. He has established that the amounts mentioned in these survey numbers except three, has no relation with him. He has just acted as power of attorney qua two persons who are residing in US. The sale consideration has been paid to them also through account payee cheques. iv) Forth inference drawn by the AO that the land was transferred at the rate of ₹ 9.00 lakhs per vigha. No doubt a calculation has been made by applying this rate. It is discernible from the pages. However, whether it has been actually acted upon by the parties, no corroborative evidence has been collected by the Revenue nor any attempt was made. The calculation was found from the residence of the assessee, but it does not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition. 33. With the assistance of the ld.DR, we have gone through the record carefully. Section 48 of the Income Tax Act and Section 50C are the relevant provisions for the present controversy. Section 48 of the income Tax Act provides mode of computation of capital gain. It contemplates that the income chargeable under the capital gains shall be computed by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset the following amounts, viz. (i) expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer, and (ii) cost of acquisition of the asset and the cost of any improvement thereto. 34. Section 50C of the Income Tax Act provide that where consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer by an assessee of a capital asset being land or building or both is less than the value adopted or assessed by any authority of a State Government for the purpose of payments of stamp duty in respect of such transfer the value so adopted by the assessee for the purpose of section 48 be deemed to be full value of the consideration received or accrued as a result of such transfer. Thus, a conjoint re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 974,754 15/10/05 63,90,056 479,254 15/3/05 68,69,310 37. The ld.AO has observed that the assessee has given a loan of ₹ 17 lakhs on which interest was charged at the rate of 18%. He calculated the interest for Asstt.Year 2003-04 of ₹ 5,93,265/-. This interest income has been added in the hands of the assessee for the Asstt.Year 2003-04 on the ground that the interest must have been accrued to the assessee in this year. On the strength of similar calculation, he calculated the interest at ₹ 7,00,053/- and in other years i.e. upto the Asstt.Year 2006-07. For the purpose of Asstt.Year 2007-08 and 2008-09, it is observed that a paper inventorised as page no.75 of Annexure AS/5 was found. According to the AO, the assessee has given a loan of ₹ 20 laksh on 15.1.2007 at the rate of 18%. 38. The interest accrued on these advances is ₹ 75,000/- relevant to the Asstt.Year 2007-08 and ₹ 2,55,000/- relevant for the Asstt.Year 2008-09. 39. With the assistance of the ld. Representative, we have perused bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d him for resolving different types of disputes. Someone must have made some calculations and the paper remained there. The stationery used is also of the panchayat. The ld. Revenue authorities have not accepted the contentions of the assessee. 41. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has reiterated his contentions as were raised before the Revenue authorities. The ld.DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the Revenue authorities. 42. A perusal of the seized paper would indicate that except noting of the amount and the dates nothing else is discernible. We have perused the statement of the assessee recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, whose English translation is available on page no.29 to 63 of the paper book. The search team has nowhere confronted the assessee specifically with these two pages. A vague question under question no.28 has been asked. The question is Today during the course of search proceedings from you house loose papers/documents as per file no.AS-5 page no.1 t6o 108 are found, which have been seized which are having page no.1 to 108. You check it one by one. I am showing serial wise, explain the same . The reply of the assessee is after having ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ining any books of accounts as mentioned by the AO in the assessment order, still the addition of opening balance cannot be made if it is proved that the investments and the liabilities are pertaining to the period prior to 1/4/2002 The AO is therefore directed to verify whether the appellant has been filing the balance sheet with the return of income in earlier assessment years i.e. assessment years 1989-99, 1999-2000, 2001-2002 and 2002-03. If it is found by him that the appellant has filed the balance sheet with the return of income or the assessment year 2002-03, and in the said return the investment and liabilities are shown which resulted in the capital balance can be made in assessment year 2003- 2004. However, if the AO finds that no balance sheet has been filed by the appellant with the returns of income of earlier year particulars assessment year 2002-03, then the onus is on the assessee to prove that the investments and the liabilities shown as on 31/3/2002 are pertaining to the period prior to 1/4/2002. If the assessee is able to prove before the AO that the investments and the liabilities are pertaining to earlier years, then only the addition made by him is directed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come offered by the assessee of ₹ 9 lakhs can easily be take care of alleged unaccounted cash found during the course of search carried out during the accounting period 2009-10. We find no error in the finding of the ld.CIT(A), which is confirmed and the ground of appeal of the Revenue is rejected. 51. The next grievance of the Revenue is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 7,43,000/-. 52. Brief facts of the case are that at time of search loose papers inventorised as page nos.46 to 48 of Annexure-AS/5 were found. On perusal of these papers, it revealed that the amount totaling to ₹ 7,43,000/- was taken from ten individuals. The assessee has contended that these papers relate to Liberty Polymers Industries, which is a partnership firm where his wife is a partner. The balance sheet of M/s.Liberty Polymers from its books of accounts was filed before the AO. It was contended that these loans were taken long back, and therefore, not assessable in the hands of the assessee. The ld.AO did not accept contentions of the assessee. 53. On appeal, the ld.CIT(A) has accepted the contentions of the assessee. The findings recorded by the ld.CIT(A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assesse was that Shri Narayan Shroff has charged a very high interest rate and also asked for collateral securities, and therefore, the transaction was not executed. The ld.AO did not accept this contention of the assessee. He made addition of ₹ 18,50,000/-. 57. On appeal, the ld.CIT(A) in principle agreed with the AO that no person would execute the promissory note in favour of a shroff unless gets finance, but he deleted the addition. The finding of the CIT(A) reads as under: 11. I have considered the submissions of the appellant. It is not denied by the appellant that his signatures are appearing on the promissory notes totaling ₹ 18.50 Lacs. All the promissory notes have been duly signed by the appellant. One of them for ₹ 4.50 Lacs is in the name of the appellant whereas the balance four of ₹ 41akh, 4 lakh, 4 lakh and ₹ 2 Lacs are blank. I would have accepted the contention of the AR that neither any loan was taken by the appellant from the shroff nor the same was returned back to him, if the promissory notes were signed by the appellant. The fact that all the promissory notes had been signed by the appellant clearly shows that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the order of the CIT(A). 59. On due consideration of the facts, we find that the no amount is outstanding towards the assessee taken from the Shroff. Because, according to the CIT(A), if the assessee has taken loan and then returned that loan and collected back his promissory note, then also no unaccounted income could be construed as generated. The AO did not find unexplained investment during the course of search. Thus, we do not find any error in the findings of the ld.CIT(A) extracted (supra). This ground of the Revenue is also rejected. 60. The next grievance of the Revenue is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of 2,48,570/-. The finding of the ld.CIT(A) on this issue reads as under: 13. I have considered the submissions of the appellant. I have also seen the seized pages 39 and 40 of Annexure AS-1. In fact, entries are appearing not only on page number 39 and 40 but also back side of page number 39 and 40. The AO has considered the resultant figure of ₹ 114,726 appearing at page number 40 and ₹ 133,844 at page number 39, the total of which comes to ₹ 248,570. In fact on the back side o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
