TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1773X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has also filed copy of purchase deed which was executed on 24/12/2013 and market value of the said flat has been determined by the Registrar at ₹ 2,72,20,000/- for the purpose of stamp duty. When the market value of the flat which was agreed to be purchased in 2010 for a purchase of price ₹ 2, 75,00,000/- is determined after more than three years by the Sub Registrar at ₹ 2,72,20,000/-, there is no reason for the AO to make additions towards alleged cash payment only on the basis statement of some persons, more particularly when the persons who gave such statements have been subsequently retracted statement by filing a sworn affidavit. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering relevant facts and also by following the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri. Kishanchand Chellaram [ 1980 (9) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] held that the AO has made additions without conducting any independent enquiry and solely on the basis of information received from DDIT (Inv.) without there being any further evidences to support his findings that a sum of ₹ 100 Lacs alleged to have been paid in cash by the assessee. We do not find any error in the findings of CIT(A) - Decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no cash has been received for booking flat, therefore, the question of making additions towards cash payment u/s 69A of the Act does not arise. 3. The AO after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon statement recorded from CEO of M/s Nish Developers P. Ltd., came to the conclusion that the assessee has failed to bring on record the source of cash of ₹ 1 crore paid to the M/s Nish Developers P. Ltd. on 02/06/2012,16/06/2012, 22/08/2012 and on 06/09/2012, he therefore, made additions of ₹ 1 crore u/s 69 A of the I.T. Act, 1961. The relevant findings of the AO are as under:- 4.3 The letter from M/s Nish Developers Pvt. Ltd, is carefully considered. At the letter. it can be seen that M/s Nish Developers Pvt. Ltd has not rejected that the cash is received by it. It only says that the it has not recorded any entry for payment of any cash amounting to ₹ 1,00,00,000/- from ,the assesses in their books of accounts. It further confirms that it has till date received a sum of ₹ 1,47,75,002/- from the assesses towards the booking / purchase of flat------it further confirms that the entire proceeds of ₹ 1,47,75,002/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the Ld. CIT(A) are that he has neither paid cash nor the developer has admitted of having receiving cash for booking flat. Although, there was a statement from one employee, but such statement has been subsequently retracted by filing affidavit. Therefore, the same cannot be taken as conclusive evidence. The assessee further submitted that as per agreement between M/s. Nish Developers Pvt.Ltd. and the assesee , the agreed price for purchase of flat is at ₹ 2,75,00,000/-. The market value of the flat as on the date of agreement was at ₹ 2,72,20,000/- therefore, it is highly incorrect on the part of the AO to hold that cash has been paid for booking flat. 5. The CIT(A) after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also taken into account additional evidence filed by the assessee came to the conclusion that when the person who gave statement u/s 132(4), retracted from his admission by filing a sworn affidavit, the AO was erred in reaching to the conclusion that the assessee has paid cash for booking flat. The Ld.CIT(A) further observed that when the assessee has specifically asked for copies of statements, which the AO has heavily relied upon and also s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,75,00,000/- is determined after more than 3 years by the sub-registrar at ₹ 2,72,20,000/-, there is no reason of making any cash payment or on money as alleged by the AO. The appellant also furnished the copy of correspondence letter with builder wherein builder clearly denied receiving any on money . The market value determined by the Sub-Registrar for stamp-duty purposes is less than the purchase consideration which proves that there is absolutely no scope for on-money in this transaction of purchase of flat. The AO has made addition of ₹ 100 Lakhs without any evidence except the alleged submission of one Mr. Pravin Mishra, which has subsequently been withdrawn by the builder. 5.3 In support of his claim the appellant fifed copy of agreement and details of payment made regarding purchase of flat. The agreement for purchase of the flat was executed on 24/12/2013 for a total agreed purchase consideration of ₹ 2,75.00,000/-. from the registration receipt dated 26/12/2013 of the said flat I find that the market value determined by the sub-registrar for stamp duty purpose was ₹ 2,72,20,000/- which is less than purchase price and payment was made throug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orting order of the CIT(A) submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the additions made towards cash payments for booking flat, when the assessee has explained with necessary evidences that no cash has been exchanged between the parties in respect of booking flat. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee has filed an agreement between the parties as per which the value of the flat as per market rate is less than the agreement value which is evident from the fact that the sale deed executed on 24/12/2013 is catagorically proves that market value of the said flat has been determined by the Registrar at ₹ 2,72,20,000/-. Further, the person who gave statement has been retracted from such statement with sworn affidavit and stated that no cash has been received for booking flat. Under these facts, the CIT(A) rightly reached to the conclusion that the AO has made additions without conducting any independent enquiry and solely relying on the information received from DDIT (Inv.) and hence, order of the CIT(A) should be confirmed. 8. We have heard both the parties, perused material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. The AO has made addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
