9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Impugning orders of Assessing Officer, Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), and Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding addition of Rs. 7,00,000 to appellant-assessee's income.
Summary: The appellant-assessee challenged orders of various authorities regarding the addition of Rs. 7,00,000 to his income from the sale of agricultural land. The appellant claimed the amount was earnest money forfeited due to the buyer's non-compliance with the sale agreement. However, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal concluded that the forfeiture claim was fabricated to evade tax liability. The authorities found discrepancies in the transaction, such as the buyer not requesting an extension for the registration deed and financial inconsistencies of the buyer, indicating the agreement was a sham. The Assessing Officer, Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), and Income-tax Appellate Tribunal concurred that the agreement was bogus based on factual investigations and statements from the buyer. The High Court upheld the decisions of the Revenue Authorities, stating that the agreement was indeed a sham transaction. The Court found no legal issue warranting intervention and dismissed the appeal.
|
