TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - I.T.A .No.-4308/Del/2014 - - - Dated:- 19-8-2016 - SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. Rohit Madan, Adv For The Respondent : Sh. Farhat Khan, Sr.DR ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 16.05.2014 of CIT(A)-XXVIII, New Delhi pertaining to 2004-05 assessment year on the following grounds:- 1) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as in facts in holding that the Ld. Income Tax Officer was justified in assessing the Income of the appellant at a total income of ₹ 18,67,850/-as against the returned Income of ₹ 67,850/-. 2) That the L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s stated to have been supported by a MOU filed in the Court. The assessee claimed that loans had been given to the parties on the various dates and since the party was unable to repay the amounts alongwith the interests thereon, it was thus adjusted as an advance against the said property. The submission as extracted at page 3 4 of the impugned order shows that the assessee claimed that various payments were made by cheque and some were stated to have been paid in cash at the time of entering into the Memorandum of Understanding. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder:- {3} In the appeal filed, the appellant has raised the following grounds: 1. That the Income Tax Officer has erred in law as well as in facts in making the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0060 as a tenant at a monthly rent of ₹ 800/-. That the said house was owned by Mrs. Harjinder Kaur at that time and was subsequently sold to Mrs. Ram Payari Khosla in 1982, who admitted the tenancy in continuation. Further, in September, 1985 on account of the good conduct of the appellant, the landlady rented out barsati floor of property no. 559/560, Double Storey, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi- 110060, to the appellant's brother/mother on an enhanced monthly rent of ₹ 1,500/- for 559, 1st Floor and another lease was executed for the barsati floor at a monthly rent of ₹ 1,200/-. In December, 1986 the landlady expired, leaving behind 4 sons and 3 daughters as legal heirs. That there was a dispute amongst the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has taken a myopic view and treated the entire advance payment towards purchase of property as undisclosed income failing to appreciate the fact that the sum was paid out of the hard earned money of the appellant over a period of eight years i.e. 1995 to 2003 and that too was not entirely only by the assessee himself but by his family members as well. That the details of the payments had been discussed with the Ld. Income Tax Officer and are being provided as under for your kind consideration. Details of ₹ 14,75,000/- (Fourteen lakhs seventy five thousand only). Year Particulars Amount 1995 Cash paid to Mr. Satya Dev by Mrs. Sheel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cheque to Svs. Satya Dev, Hari Dev, Baldev K.K. Khosla (Details annexed) 1,20,000/- 2003 Paid by Cheque to Svs. Satya Dev, Hari Dev, Baldev K.K. Khosla (Details annexed) 60,000/- 2003 Interest on loan of ₹ 5,00, 000/- for 8 years @9% 3,60,000/- 2003 Interest on loan of ₹ 5,00,000/- for 8 years @9% 54,000/- Total ₹ 14,72,000/- treated as 14,75,000/- as agreed 14,75,000/- Details of ₹ 3,25,000/- (Three lakhs twenty five thousand only) in of, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings over the years. Further the amount even includes sums paid by the family members of the appellant. Confirmations and copies of Income tax return acknowledgements of the family members, as well as Affidavit pertaining to pledging of jewellery by the appellant's wife had been submitted before the Ld. Assessing Officer and are once again enclosed for/our honour's perusal. Further, a copy of the Memorandum of understanding as well as affidavit of the appellant submitted before Honourable Delhi High Court is attached alongwith that the AG has failed to appreciate that the fact that the property was to be jointly purchased by the appellant as well as his mother even though the MOV was entered into by the appellant. Ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
