TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1672X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave been received as per final statement is duly reflected in the company s account, then, due credit should be given to the token advance paid by the assessee on 14.01.2003, which is not reflected in the final statement or otherwise. The assessee has raised an alternative plea that the payments numbered as 1 to 4 fall in the financial year 2002-03 relevant to assessment year 2003-04, which is barred by limitation. Admittedly, the transaction entered into viz., agreement of sale of undivided share of land and department store to be constructed with Aadhithiya Constructions is single property spread over to various years and when the sources are in question, the said sources are to be seen for the property as a whole as has been rig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onducted at the business premises of M/s. Ambika Appalam Company Pvt. Ltd. under section 133A of the Act on 07.08.2009 in which the assessee is the Managing Director holding more than 10% of the shares. During the coure of scrutiny proceedings of the company for the assessment year 2007-08 and the details collected during the survey proceedings, the company has granted loans to its Managing Director Shri K.V. Vijayaraghavan amounting to ₹.19,59,402/- during the year relevant to the assessment year 2005-06. Therefore, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was duly issued on 22.03.2010. After considering various submissions during the reassessment proceedings, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- was disallowed and added to the income of the assessee as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee and mainly relying on the final statement of M/s. Aadhithiya Constructions stated to have impounded at the premises of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made under section 69 of the Act. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that in response to reasons for reopening of assessment, vide letter dated 04.10.2010, the assessee has furnished complete explanation in regard to the transaction vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the course of survey under section 133A of the Act on 07.08.2009, a sheet, vide impounded documents in ANN/LS/BS/IMP-2, shows the cost of flat as ₹.24,91,250/- with the title 'Final Statement' given by M/s. Aadhlthiya Constructions was taken from the business premises of M/s. Ambika Appalam Co. Pvt. Ltd. The assessee has not agreed with the statement of M/s. Aadhithiya Constructions, since the amount does not confirm with their books of accounts. 6.1 In response to reasons for reopening of assessment, vide letter dated 04.10.2010, the assessee furnished complete explanation in regard to the transaction viz., agreement of sale of undivided share of land and department store to be constructed with Aadhithiya Const ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een 17.08.2002 to 25.05.2004, inter alia, the credential of the final statement is doubtful. Under the above facts and circumstances, the Assessing Officer is directed to call for the complete details of M/s. Aadhithiya Constructions and verify the accountability of all the payments stated to have been received by it in the final statement in that company s books of account and decide the issue afresh. In case the payments stated to have been received as per final statement is duly reflected in the company s account, then, due credit should be given to the token advance of ₹.4,00,000/- paid by the assessee on 14.01.2003, which is not reflected in the final statement or otherwise. 6.2 The assessee has raised an al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|