TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o deduction was claimed by the appellant - Held that:- The Tribunal in the group cases of the assessee on identical facts have held that the payment made for acquisition of land was not claimed as a deduction and hence the provisions of S.40A(3) of the Act is not applicable. See case of Glitz Builders and Promoters Pvt.Ltd [2015 (5) TMI 384 - ITAT DELHI] as held that when the cost of the land as well as additional payment is not claimed by the assessee as deduction, the question of any disallowance under Section 40A(3) or otherwise in the case of the assessee does not arise. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1369/Del/2013, ITA No. 1766/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 4-3-2015 - G. D. Agrawal (Vice President) And George George K. (Judici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment order that total such interest payable comes to ₹ 15,75,107/- on PDCs and such interest is paid in cash outside of books of account. Therefore, such interest is added as unaccounted/unexplained expenses. 4. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority. The CIT(A) after examining the seized papers/documents directed to recomputed the interest on PDCs. The CIT(A) was of the view that interest on PDCs is to be calculated after six months from the date of the issue of the PDCs. The Revenue being aggrieved is in appeal before us. 5. At the very outset the Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue in question is covered by the order of the Tribunal in the group case of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cs at the time of extension of the PDCs. He has further observed that if it is not possible to work out the extension of PDCs in each case, then the A.O. is directed to recomputed interest on PDCs after six months from the date of issue of the PDCs. Therefore, the ground of appeal of the Revenue that the CIT(A) deleted the addition of ₹ 5,06,625/- made by the A.O. on account of interest on PDCs is factually incorrect and contrary to the order of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) directed to recalculate the interest on PDCs and there was a sound logic for such direction. His direction is based on material found and seized at the time of search. In view of the above, we do not find any justification to interfere with the order of ld.CIT(A) in this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld.A.R. To decide the issue of disallowability u/s 40A(3) pointed out by learned AR, it is proper to examine the terms of collaboration agreement and facts of the case. The appellant purchases the land from various farmers/land owners in its own name by entering into sale deed. Registration is done in the name of assessee. The payment is made by assessee. As per the collaboration agreement, the assessee company would acquire the land and transfer 100% of its development right to M/s CWPPL. The assessee company is shown as owner of the land. In lieu of transferring the development right, the assessee company gets cost of land plus ₹ 35,000 per acre for CWPPL. This being the case, what is transferred is the development right, the owne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rin Alkalies Chemcials and Fertiflisers Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172. 12 . The assessee being aggrieved is in appeal before us. 13 . The Ld. Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted that the issue in question is covered in favour of the assessee by the orders of the Tribunal in the case of Glitz Builders and Promoters Pvt.Ltd. 1747/Del/2013 dt. 2.1.2015 for the A.Y. 2006-07 and in the case of Westland Developers Pvt.Ltd. in ITA 1752/Del/2013 vide order dt. 22.8.2014 for the A.Y. 2006-07. The Ld.D.R. was unable to controvert the submissions made by the Ld.Authorised Representative. 14 . We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Tribunal in the group cases of the assessee on ident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
