TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hase of land by both the companies. Merely, because the assessee s PAN number was mentioned as he was the Director of one of the company, the purchase cannot be said to be made by him when the purchase has been shown in the P L account by the said company itself as well as part of the closing stock of the said company, namely, Iscon Procon Pvt. Ltd. In that view of the matter, the addition made by the Ld.AO has been rightly found to be not justified and deleted by the Ld.CIT (A), which, in our considered opinion is just and proper so as to warrant interference. In that view of the matter, the Revenue s ground of the appeal is found to be devoid of any merit and thus dismissed. Revenue s appeal is dismissed. - I.T.A. No. 1973/Ahd/2017 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hinagar. Since, the basic details regarding the proof of investment and the source of investment was not filed by the assessee, a show cause notice dated 13.07.2016 was served, in response whereof on 20.07.2016, the assessee in writing placed this particular fact of not purchasing the property in question rather than the same was purchased by (i) Chehar Realty Pvt. Ltd. (ii) Iscon Procon Pvt. Ltd. Since the PAN of the assessee was used as per AIR information further show cause was issued to furnish the copy of purchase deed, break-up of payment, audited balance sheet and bank statement of Iscon Procon Pvt. Ltd. alongwith proof of transaction made by the company. It was placed on record that the assessee is the Director of the said company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of the above position and the documents filed the following indisputable facts emerge for consideration. i. That the investment for the Ambapur Land has not been made by the appellant herein, but the Company, Iscon Procon Pvt. Ltd. ii. That this factual oosition has been confirmed by the Company, iii. That the Company has now produced the cash book for the F. Y. 2013-14 showing the investment. 4. Your Honour will kindly see that the learned AO has made such a huge addition in the hands of the appellant merely because through mistake his PAN came to be mentioned on the document of purchase instead of that of the Company. The confirmations filed by the Company and the other joint purchaser, Chehar Realty Pvt. Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he addition. In the instant case facts emerging from the record before the AO proves that the investment is not made by the appellant. In these circumstances, it is submitted that the addition is unwarranted and unjustified on facts and in law. It is therefore prayed that the addition of Rs.2,64,88,300/- made by the AO may kindly be deleted. 5. We request your Honour to kindly consider the above submissions as well as the previous submissions and to delete the addition of Rs,2,64,88,300/- and oblige. 5.2 Considering the statement made by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) granted relief by deleting the addition with following observations: 6. I have considered the facts of the case, assessment order and the submission filed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid company as per provisions of law. The disallowance and addition made of Rs.2,64,88.,300/- is held not justified and is directed to be deleted. Relevant ground of appeal is allowed in favour of the appellant. 5.3 After considering the entire aspect of the matter, we find that the Ld.AO has made addition of 50% of the total value of the land as the appellant has not been able to explain the source of payment made in respect of purchase of land. However, it appears from the detailed submissions made by the assessee supported by the sufficient documents, particularly, the cash book of the company, namely, Iscon Procon Pvt. Ltd. showing the source of investment made for such purchase of land situated at Ambapur, Gandhinagar, with anoth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
