9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1074X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t charged by the assessee from sale of office space in Siddh Icon project, Baner. On being called upon to explain as to why there was such a difference in the rates, the assessee submitted the reasons which did not convince the AO. He bifurcated sale of flats in three periods. The first period consisted of February, 2012 to July, 2012. In the respective tabulation, the AO observed that the highest rate charged by the assessee against Office No.502 during the period was Rs. 7981.22 per sq.ft. Certain other offices sold within that period at Rs. 3109.45 per sq.ft. and Rs. 5677.83 per sq.ft respectively were held to be transferred with under hand receipt in cash. Applying the peak rate of Rs. 7981.22 per sq.ft. to the other sale transactions conducted during the period, the AO worked out a difference of Rs. 2,29,91,046/- as chargeable to tax. Similar exercise was done for the second period, namely, April, 2011 to October, 2011 with the peak rate of Rs. 6087.68 per sq.ft., thereby computing difference in the stated consideration at Rs. 1,52,16,459/-. In the like manner, he computed the difference in consideration at Rs. 1,19,95,966/- for the third period starting from December 2013 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecember, 2013 to February, 2014 that the AO applied the peak rate and made the addition of Rs. 1,19,95,966/-, which the ld. CIT(A) restored to the AO in terms of section 43CA of the Act. 7. Section 43CA of the Act is a special provision for full value of consideration in case of transfer of assets other than capital assets in certain cases. It provides that where the consideration received etc., on transfer of any asset other than capital asset, being land or building or both is less than the stamp value, amount of profit and gain from transfer of such assets shall be computed by considering the stamp value as full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. Sub-section (2) of section 43CA states that the provisions of section 50C(2) and (3) and shall so far as may be, apply in relation to the determination of the value adopted or assessed or assessable under sub-section (1). The ld. CIT(A) took note of the mandate of section 43CA and certain other decisions on this issue for holding that the addition of Rs. 1.19 crore made on account of difference in the agreed sale consideration shown in the agreement for respective flat and that of peak rate was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id not make any fresh advances during the year and the amount of Rs. 4.30 crore, on which interest disallowance of Rs. 51,68,089/- has been made, were loans given in earlier years. We have examined the assessee's balance sheet, a copy of which has been placed at page 60 onwards of the paper book. There is an item 'Long Term Loans and Advances' under the head 'Non Current Assets' with closing balance at Rs. 4,30,67,413/- and opening balance at Rs. 8,79,01,328/-. It is on the basis of such closing figures that the assessee claimed that no fresh loan was advanced during the year calling for disallowance of interest. Note No.9 contains details of this head, which have been given at page 63 of the paper book. On going through such details, it transpires that the assessee had given loans and advances to related parties with the closing balance at the end of the preceding year at Rs. 6,34,54,712/- which came down to Nil at the end of the year under consideration. It means that the loans advanced to related parties in earlier years were totally received back. `Other loans and advances' standing at Rs. 1,04,32,416/- at the beginning of the year swelled to Rs. 4,15,61,062/- at the end of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t-aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of the AO for deciding this issue afresh in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities (supra). Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed reasonable opportunity of hearing. 13. Ground No.4 is against the deletion of addition of Rs. 2,29,28,728/- made by the AO on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act in the hands of the assessee on protective basis. The factual matrix of this ground is that the AO found the assessee to have advanced loan to related parties Siddhesh Properties Pvt. Ltd., Siddhesh Realty Property Pvt. Ltd., and Siddhesh Builders Pvt. Ltd. There was common shareholding of two directors which was more than 20% in each entity. The AO held that the assessee had advanced loans to the parties wherein the Directors' had substantial interest. The AO observed that albeit the deemed dividend was to be taxed in the hands of the shareholders, he also chose to make protective addition in the hands of the assessee to the extent of Rs. 2,29,28,728/-. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the protective addition. 14. Having heard both the sides and gone through the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
