TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooking amounts and have also submitted their confirmations in this regard. The remand report further states that the remaining 3 persons have stated that the cancellation amounts were converted into unsecured loans and interest was received by them on the said amounts. It has also been mentioned in the remand report that in the case of one Smt Smitaben Mahendra Kumar Patel she was allotted shop No. 3 against her booking. Thus a perusal of the remand report submitted by the assessing officer in this regard clinches the issue in favour of the assessee in as much as out of the 14 persons, 13 persons have duly accepted and confirmed the transactions. AO has also examined their creditworthiness and has not drawn any negative inference in this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition of ₹ 52,14,000/-. ITA No. 2347/AHD/2016 is against that order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Gandhinagar wherein the Ld. first appellate authority has upheld the imposition of penalty imposed under section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act ). Both the appeals pertain to assessment year 2006 07. Both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of through this common order for the sake of convenience. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business as builders and developers. The return of income was filed declaring a gross total loss of ₹ 9,33,845/-. The return was initially p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted copies of their PAN, copy of Ledger accounts and copy of returns of income but the assessee has not provided any bank statements of the third parties to prove the source of income. The Ld. first appellate authority proceeded to confirm this addition of ₹ 52,14,000/- and now the assessee is before this Tribunal again and has challenged the confirmation by the Ld. first appellate authority. 2.4 The assessing officer also proceeded to impose a penalty of ₹ 14,40,710/- under section 271 (1) (c) of the Act on the addition of ₹ 52,14,000/-. This penalty was also confirmed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) and the assessee is before this Tribunal challenging the confirmation of the penalty also. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e remand report the assessing officer has examined the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions on oath and it has been verified from the statement/s recorded that all the 13 persons have made their bookings and have invested/paid to the assessee for booking of the property of M/s Prerna Developers. The Ld. authorised representative further submitted that the statements recorded by the assessing officer were also forwarded to the Tribunal for perusual. It was further submitted that as per the remand report, out of 13 persons 9 persons had stated that they had cancelled their bookings and had received back their booking amounts and had submitted confirmations in this regard. It was further submitted that the remaining 3 persons h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestigation and examination. In the fresh assessment proceedings, in pursuance to the directions of the Tribunal, the assessing officer initiated investigation and the assessee did submit confirmations, bank details and addresses of the 14 persons. As per the assessing officer, he had issued summons/notices under section 133 (6) of the Act requiring response from these 14 parties but somehow none of them responded to the query of the assessing officer. The assessing officer, thereafter, did not carry out any further investigation and again made the same addition. The appeal to the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also did not bring any relief to the assessee. Thereafter, after the matter having reached the Tribunal again, on an ear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty. It has also been stated by the assessing officer that out of the 13 persons, 9 persons have stated that they have cancelled their bookings and have received back their booking amounts and have also submitted their confirmations in this regard. The remand report further states that the remaining 3 persons have stated that the cancellation amounts were converted into unsecured loans and interest was received by them on the said amounts. It has also been mentioned in the remand report that in the case of one Smt Smitaben Mahendra Kumar Patel she was allotted shop No. 3 against her booking. Thus a perusal of the remand report submitted by the assessing officer in this regard clinches the issue in favour of the assessee in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
