9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 770X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Developers, by holding the same to be income liable to tax u/s.68 of the I.T.Act as 'unexplained cash credit'. b. The ld CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that amount received by the appellant from M/s. Laxmi Developers being towards sale of development rights was out side the ambit of the provisions of se.68 of the I.T.Act, 1961. c. The ld CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that the income arising from sale of development rights was liable to tax in the year in which the said development rights were sold by the appellant firm and not in the year under appeal." 3. To adjudicate on this ground of appeal, only a few material facts need to be taken note of. The assessee is engaged in the business of builder and developer. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that only when an amount credited in assessee's books remains unexplained -either because on account of genuineness of transaction or on account of lack of means of persons making the payment, section 68 can be invoked. Learned counsel then takes us through the details of transaction for sale of land, in the year 2000, to demonstrate the purpose for which payment was made. He also submits that this aspect of the matter, i.e. genuineness of transaction for which payment has been made was not called into question by the revenue authorities. We are thus urged to delete the impugned addition. Learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submits that admittedly what has been shown as loan to the assessee does not constitute a loan, no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer's case that entire receipts can be treated as taxable income. Remedy to misconduct of the assessee, even if that be so, does not lie in treating the part of sale consideration, received in this year, as unexplained credit u/s.68. We, therefore, uphold the grievance of the assessee and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned addition of Rs.11,54,160. The assessee gets the relief accordingly. 6. Ground No.1 is thus allowed. 7. In Ground No.2, the assessee has raised the following grievance: "The ld CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.5,47,879 as 'unexplained money' u/s.69A of the I.T.Act by holding the said amount to be unaccounted WIP of the appellant, ignoring the fact that the ld AO had arrived at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t addition has been made on account of understating the value of an asset in the balance sheet, and that it only shows clearly incorrect accounts. What has been offered to tax in the profit and loss account is income but what has been brought to tax, by way of impugned addition, is understatement of the value of the asset in balance sheet, which could be attributed to a variety of factors such as sale of this WIP out of books of account. No explanation whatsoever has been offered for the discrepancy. Under these circumstances, and in view of limited argument of the assessee-which we have rejected on merits, we confirm the action of the authorities below and decline to interfere in the matter. 10. Ground No.2 is thus dismissed. 11. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
