9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no claim of refund was made either by Shri Sudershan Kapoor in his life time or his legal heirs after his death, there is no possibility of any claim or refund in future because it is barred by limitation. Since this amount has not been paid to the legal heirs of Shri Sudershan Kapoor, I am of the view that the lower authorities have rightly treated this amount as income of the assessee. Moreover, I do not find any force in the contention of the assessee that section 41(1) cannot be invoked in the instant case because the assessee was engaged in the construction business and the amount was received as an advance of booking of flat, which was shown by the assessee as a trade liability. Once the trade liability is ceased to exist, it becomes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ges and remaining amount of Rs. 1,00,450 remained outstanding in his name, but this amount was neither paid to Shri Sudershan Kapoor nor claimed by him or his legal heirs till the end of the impugned financial year. It was also noted by the Assessing Officer that Shri Sudershan Kapoor has passed away and since the possibility of claim of refund by his legal heirs was completely ruled out, the trade liability has been ceased to exist and accordingly after invoking the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act, this amount was treated as income of the assessee. 4. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) with the submission that this amount was shown as outstanding in the name of the Shri Sudershan Kapoor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the amount has been asked as refund by the legal heir. No such proof have been submitted at the assessment stage as well as at the appellant stage. In view of the above cited judgment of Allahabad High Court the authorized representative of the appellant argued that it cannot be taxed under section 41(1) of the Act. The case of the appellant company is altogether different with the case cited above. In the present case the appellant company has itself cancelled the booking in 1999. Looking to the fact that the appellant company has failed to establish the fact that the amount has been claimed as refund by party or by legal heir etc. The appellant company has already been claimed all the expenses relevant to the project started at Vaish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his life time or his legal heirs after his death, there is no possibility of any claim or refund in future because it is barred by limitation. Since this amount has not been paid to the legal heirs of Shri Sudershan Kapoor, I am of the view that the lower authorities have rightly treated this amount as income of the assessee. Moreover, I do not find any force in the contention of the assessee that section 41(1) cannot be invoked in the instant case because the assessee was engaged in the construction business and the amount was received as an advance of booking of flat, which was shown by the assessee as a trade liability. Once the trade liability is ceased to exist, it becomes an income of the assessee under the provisions of section 41(1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
