TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 831X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credited against the sale of gold ornaments - Held that:- Assessee has submitted the necessary details and receipt of the transaction - AO has not made any enquiry or verification regarding the documents shown - he has himself noted that since the period of time barring was approaching, necessary verification could not be done - thus we agree with the CIT(A) that addition has been made on surmises and conjuncture without cogently rebutting the evidence submitted by the assessee - thus there is no infirmity in its order - hence appeal of revenue is dismissed. - ITA no.231/Nag./2017 - - - Dated:- 14-6-2018 - SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri R. K. Baral For The Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been made 40A(3) of the Act. 4. Upon the assessee s appeal, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) noted the submissions of the assessee. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) noted that the Assessing Officer has not controverted the assessee s contention that the land has been purchased from agriculturalist which has been shown by the assessee as stock-in-trade in his balance sheet. The genuineness of the transaction has not been disputed by the Assessing Officer. He further noted that no payment for this land has been made during the year under consideration. He further noted that on same facts in another case the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has deleted the similar addition. Referring to the same, the ld. Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... premium amount to the State Government for granting the permission. Issar Chhithi has registered before sub Registrar payment as per Issar Chhithi have made to both the sellers before the sub Registrar on 22.07.2012 (i.e.FY 11-12 AY 12-13) and kept as an issar amount in balance sheet. Both the sellers are agriculturist there 7/12 extract attached with sale deed. Both are residing in village and are not much literate. (2) That both the parties from whom we have purchased were litigant and we have fear that if payment could have been made in advance then they would not have been turn-up to register the Issar Chhithi. Therefore we have made the cash payment to the seller before the registrar at the sub Registrar office. Payments made be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this regard (in Asst. CIT vs. R. P. Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. in Tax Case (Income Tax Appeal) No. 13 of 2016 (95 CCH 0086 Chhattisgarh High Court vide order dated 01.03.2016), the Hon ble High Court had concluded as under: The Tribunal again noticed that full payment had been made to the seller under the registered deeds was not disputed by the Assessing Officer and neither was the identity or genuineness of the sellers in dispute or the contention of the assessee that the sellers being villagers had no bank accounts and therefore insisted on cash payment. The Tribunal held that payment in cash was out of business compulsion and not optional. The Tribunal held that the facts of the case were in pari materia with Saraswati Housing Dev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before us with regard to :he same. We are satisfied that the appeal ought not to have filed and raises no substantial question of law for determination under Section 260A of the Act. 9. Upon careful consideration, we find that the above case law is applicable on all fours on the present appeal. The facts are similar and undisputed. The payments are made to agriculturalist. The identity and genuineness of none of the parties is disputed. The payment in cash was made out of business compulsion. Hence, respectfully following as above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Accordingly, we uphold the same. Apropos ground relating to addition u/s. 68: 10. On this issue, the Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considering the relevant factors. Accordingly, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the addition. 12. Against the above order the assessee is in appeal before us. 13. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that the assessee has submitted the necessary details and receipt of the transaction. The Assessing Officer has shown dissatisfaction on the document submitted. However, he has not made any enquiry or verification regarding the documents shown. He has himself noted that since the period of time barring was approaching, necessary verification could not be done. In these circumstances, we agree with the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that addition has been made on surmises and conjunc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
