Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 1207 - ITAT DELHI

2016 (9) TMI 1207 - ITAT DELHI - TM - Assessment of income - allegation of tax evasion - income from undisclosed sources - nature of amount of loan given earlier years and adjusted with property - Held that:- We find nothing has been brought on record to show how the entire amount can be added in the year under consideration. Accordingly, after hearing both the sides and finding that the prayer for remand was justified it was considered appropriate to set aside the impugned order and restore the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he 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 Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has, therefore, erred in law as well as in facts .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

owever, it was passed over as considering the grounds and the material the Ld.Sr.DR was unable to show how the entire addition made in the year under consideration could be added in the year under consideration. Considering the material on record, it was a common stand of the parties that the facts as found recorded in the orders need to be re-considered and addressed afresh. 3. The record shows that the assessee in the year under consideration returned an income of ₹ 68,150/-. A Tax Evasi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s the principal amount as well as interest thereon, which was lent by the appellant as well as his family members over a period of eight years i.e. From 1995 to 2003 and alter on treated as advance towards purchase of property in December, 2003 on account of inability of the owners to repay the same. ……………………………………….. {5} Grounds of appeal No. 2 and 3 are directed against, treatment of ₹ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in 1976 in search of better job opportunities and has been living in Delhi ever since. That in December, 1979 the appellant moved into property no. 559, Double Storey, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi - 110060 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, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

share filed a court case. That with a view to buy the portion of the property under his occupation, the appellant agreed to advance an interest bearing loan to sons of Mrs. Ram Payari Khosla so as to reach an out of court settlement with their sister and once the matter was resolved the property would be sold to the appellant. That in December. 2003 a Memorandum of Understanding was executed wherein it was agreed to sell the said property for a total consideration of ₹ 28,00,000/-(Rupees t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

00/-(Rupees eighteen lakhs only) to the returned income of the assessee without looking into the merits of the case, thereby creating a huge demand. Coming towards the grounds of appeal raised. Ground no.1 is general in nature and relates to the returned income of ₹ 67,850/-being assessed at ₹ 18,67,850/-. Grounds No.2 & 3 relate to the addition of ₹ 18,00,000/- whereby the Ld. Income Tax Officer has taken a myopic view and treated the entire advance payment towards purchas .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r Particulars Amount 1995 Cash paid to Mr. Satya Dev by Mrs. Sheel Graver out of sale proceeds of her property. Later on treated as interest bearing loan@ 9% in December, 2003 when the MOU was drawn up as a lot of time had elapsed. A sum of ₹ 7,50,000/- was withdrawn from her Savings Bank A/c bearing no. 14445 with State Bank of India on 9-12-1994. That the appellant is now in possession of the Bank Statement a copy of which is attached alongwith and original is being Produced for verifica .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ari Dev, Baldev & K.K. Khosla (Details annexed) 30,000/- 2001 Paid by Cheque to Svs. Satya Dev, Hari Dev, Baldev & K.K. Khosla (Details annexed) 80,000/- 2002 Paid by 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, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rom Mr. K.K. Manchanda Brother 20,000/- Cash paid by Mrs. Geetanjali Graver by pledging her Jewellery, copy of affidavit submitted before the id, A.O. enclosed. Wife 1,00,000/- Total Amoun 3,25,000/- That as can be seen from the above, the payments had been made by the appellant as well as his family members over the years. The fact that the appellant is a Qualified engineer and has been earning since 1974 cannot be discounted. The Income Tax Officer had been appraised of the facts but he failed .....

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