9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (9) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eed further for passing an assessment order under section 143(3) or 144. The CIT (Appeals) erred in not complying with the decisions of the Hon ble High Courts on the issue and passed the impugned illegal order; 2. The assessee disclosed all the facts of the case fully and truly which were also in the knowledge of the Assessing Officer on the date of processing the assessee s return under section 143(1)( a ). Issuing of the notice under section 148 by the successor Assessing Officer was for reviewing the opinion of his predecessor which is not permissible under section 147; 3. The Assessing Officer violating the provisions of section 147 issued the notice under section 148 dated 9-1-1997 for initiating the proceeding of reopening of tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment dated 6-4-1983 granting lease to his sons is a legally acceptable document. The Assessing Officer has not discharged his onus for placing evidence to show it sham and the assessee s mala fide . The Revenue is factually and legally wrong in accepting it genuine for one purpose and holding it sham on suspicion for other purpose in the assessee s case since assessment year 1984-85. The ld. CIT (Appeals) neither applied his judicial mind nor made investigation in the issue; 8. The assessee s bona fide in granting lease of his disputed and non-existing property to his sons is established with the fact that he charged higher rent of Rs. 3 per sq. ft. than the accepted receivable rent of Rs. 2.25 per sq. ft. with right to sub-let. The CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quent assessment years." 2. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee has opted not to press ground Nos. 1 to 3. Accordingly, the same are dismissed, being not pressed. 3. Through ground Nos. 4 to 12 the assessee has challenged an addition of Rs. 1,36,664 made by the Assessing Officer on account of difference of rent received by M/s. Alliance Brothers from Oriental Bank of Commerce and the rent paid by M/s. Alliance Brothers to the assessee, which was later on confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 4. Having heard the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of the record, we find that the assessee is the owner of the commercial property No. 17, Community Centre, Near Deep Cinema, Pos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for its re-adjudication. During the course of hearing, our attention was also invited by the Revenue that during the assessment year 1984-85 the issue of quantum of rent was examined by the Assessing Officer in the light of the agreement executed between the assessee and M/s. Alliance Brothers and the lease deed executed in favour of the bank and the Assessing Officer arrived at a conclusion that this agreement between the assessee and M/s. Alliance Brothers in which his sons are partners, was prepared to evade the tax liability and he accordingly quantified the total rent received by the assessee @ Rs. 6.25 per sq. ft. This matter travelled upto the Tribunal. Vide order dated 13-12-1990 the Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch the Tribunal vide its order dated 6th August, 2004 has approved the finding of the Division Bench given in its order dated 13-12-1990. In this Wealth-tax Appeal the Tribunal has already made the comments over the judgment of the SMC Bench and held that the SMC Bench cannot over-rule the order of the Division Bench of the Tribunal. 7. We, however, carefully examined the agreements executed between the assessee and M/s. Alliance Brothers and we find that though these documents called to be an agreement as per the title, but it amount to a lease deed executed in favour of M/s. Alliance Brothers. As per the provisions of the Registration Act, the lease deed with respect to immovable property is required to be registered on payment of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned counsel for the assessee would not help the assessee in any manner because here the short question involved is whether the arrangement made by the assessee to let out the property to OBC is a colourable device or a genuine document. The issue has already been examined by the Tribunal in its earlier orders and has finally held that this agreement between the assessee and M/s. Alliance Brothers is a sham document and is a colourable device to evade the tax liability. Having examined again the documents on which the assessee wants to rely, we come to the same conclusion. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Accordingly, his order is hereby confirmed. ITA No. 2360 (Delhi) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
