9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (10) TMI 106 - HC - Income TaxEvidentiary value of the documents seized AO had relied on a photocopy of an unsigned sale agreement - Held that - Unsigned photocopy of the agreement for purchase of the property cannot be a material to rely on, when the registered sale deed has been produced and the same shows that the property was purchased at a price of Rs.23,50,000/-. This registered sale deed was disclosed at the time of original assessment - Agreement of sale loses its force, the moment registered sale deed is executed. If the property has been purchased at a higher price than that of mentioned in the purchase deed, then the onus is on the Assessing Officer to establish that Decided against the Revenue.
Issues:
1. Validity of ITAT's decision regarding consideration amount based on seized documents 2. Justification of ITAT's dismissal of Revenue's appeal regarding sale agreement and receipt 3. Assessment of unsigned sale agreement photocopy as evidence of undisclosed income Issue 1: Validity of ITAT's decision regarding consideration amount based on seized documents: The appeal questioned whether the ITAT was justified in upholding the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) order without considering all materials seized during the search and the assessee's statement. The High Court noted that the Assessing Officer relied on an unsigned sale agreement photocopy to determine a consideration amount of Rs.1,68,00,000, which was not disclosed. However, the registered sale deed showed the property was purchased for Rs.23,50,000, disclosed during the original assessment. The Court held that the unsigned agreement lost its validity once the registered sale deed was executed. It emphasized that the Assessing Officer must prove any under-valuation, which was not done based on guesswork. The Court concluded that the unsigned agreement had no evidentiary value, supporting ITAT's decision. Issue 2: Justification of ITAT's dismissal of Revenue's appeal regarding sale agreement and receipt: The second issue raised the question of whether ITAT was justified in dismissing the Revenue's appeal without considering the sale agreement and receipt seized during the search. The Court highlighted that the sale agreement and receipt were crucial pieces of evidence. The Court noted that the sale agreement indicated the sale price and the receipt confirmed the advance payment received. However, the Tribunal's decision was based on factual appreciation, which the Court could not re-examine. Ultimately, the Court found no error in ITAT's judgment and dismissed the appeal. Issue 3: Assessment of unsigned sale agreement photocopy as evidence of undisclosed income: The final issue involved the assessment of the unsigned sale agreement photocopy as evidence of undisclosed income. The Court reiterated that the unsigned agreement was not reliable evidence, especially when a registered sale deed existed. It emphasized that the Assessing Officer needed concrete proof to establish under-valuation. The Court criticized the guesswork used by the Assessing Officer and supported ITAT's decision to disregard the unsigned agreement as evidence of undisclosed income. The Court concluded that without substantial evidence, the unsigned agreement held no legal weight in determining the consideration amount for the property. In summary, the High Court upheld ITAT's decision, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in tax assessments and dismissing the appeal due to the lack of substantial proof supporting the Revenue's claims.
|
