9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The assessee has filed revised grounds of appeal. 3. The first issue raised in these appeals is against the addition u/s 69 of the Act. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of purchase of lands/buildings and to develop the same for the purposes of disposing/maintaining. During the year under consideration, the assessee purchased freehold land measuring 17.83 acres for a sum of Rs. 3,31,90,000/-. This land was purchased vide 11 sale deeds which were executed between 29.8.2005 and 28.9.2005. The land is located within the MCD city limits. As the AO was not satisfied with the purchase consideration, he referred the matter to the District Valuation Officer (DVO) for estimation of investm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t material on record. It is observed that the only dispute on this issue is about the investment made by the assessee in purchase of 11 plots in the course of its business. Whereas the assessee went by the rates given in sale deeds as a proper measure of investment made, the AO estimated the investment made by the assessee on the basis of the DVO's report, which valuation was partially reduced by the ld. CIT(A). The AO, in making this addition did not reject the books of account maintained by the assessee and straightway went ahead in making the addition on the basis of the DVO's report. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sargam Cinema vs. CIT (2010) 328 ITR 513 (SC) has held that where the books of account are not rejected by the AO, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eration is 2006-07, being, a year anterior to the amendment, the same will be governed by the judgment in Sargam Cinema (supra) and not the later amendment nullifying the pro tanto effect of this judgment. 6. Here it is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer has made the addition u/s 69 of the Act. This section, in turn, provides that : `Where in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of the investments or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the value of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /-. As this is a substantive provision inserted w.e.f. 1.10.2009, the same cannot be applied to the assessment year 2006-07 under consideration. Ex consequenti, the entire addition made by the AO is deleted. The ground taken by the assessee is allowed and that by the Revenue is dismissed. 8. The only other issue which survives in the assessee's appeal is against the confirmation of addition on account of stamp duty and registration charges. Whereas the AO applied 8% rate on the alleged excess investment made by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) proportionately reduced the same. In view of the fact that the substantive addition u/s 69 of the Act on account of the alleged investment made by the assessee has been deleted in an earlier para, this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
