9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 275X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of violation of any Rule 46A. Regarding addition of ₹ 6,76,72,000/- it is amply clear from the records and the finding of the Ld.CIT(A) that the transaction relating to nine flats was on account of sale and not purchases, as wrongly understood by the AO. The assessing officer without even applying his mind on the nature of transaction, whether it is sale or purchase, has blindly relied upon uncorroborated AIR information. The assessee has adduced all the evidence before the AO including copy of sale agreements and the copy of ledger accounts, that it was a sale made to the various persons and not purchases. If this aspect has been clarified by the Sub-registrar, then it cannot be held that there was a violation of Rule 46A. Thus, such an addition has rightly been deleted by CIT(A). Regarding addition of ₹ 75 lakhs, it is seen that there was a double entry in the AIR details, the AO without applying his mind and also without verifying the assessee’s contention has made the addition. Such an approach of the AO is wholly unjustified and uncalled for not only in law but also on facts. Thus, there is no merit in the grounds raised by the revenue and hence, same are di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w, the CIT(A) has erred in admitting fresh evidences without giving the AO an opportunity, violating norms of Rule 46A. The procedure followed by CIT(A) is not correct. Thus in all the grounds, the revenue has challenged the order of the Ld.CIT(A), mainly on the ground that there is a violation of Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of builders and developers. The assessing officer received information through AIR, wherein it was reported that assessee has deposited cash of ₹ 4.50 crore on 12.07.2006 with Joint Sub-registrar office Kurla. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee explained that it has not deposited any cash of ₹ 4.50 crores with the Sub-registrar. In support, the assessee filed copy of registered document and relevant ledger account appearing in the books of account that the payment was made through account payee cheques. The assessee had entered into a developed agreement with M/s. Mam Ratna Developers which was registered on 12.06.2006 with Subregistrar, Kurla for total consideration of ₹ 4.50 crores. In the AIR information it was reported that the registrar had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntry of ₹ 4.50 Crore. The code 001 is actually meant for cash deposits into savings bank account above ₹ 1 Lac. I also find from the documents that the sale deed is dated 12/06/06 and the same is registered on 12/07/06. Also the amount is duly accounted for in the books. I therefore come to the conclusion that, the addition of ₹ 4.50 Crore is uncalled for and unjustified. Accordingly, I direct the AO to delete the addition. The ground is allowed. 5. As regard 2nd and 3rd addition, it was explained by the assessee that, the transaction represented registration of sale documents in respect of nine flats sold by the assessee and there was no purchase transaction as wrongly understood by the AO. On this issue also, the assessee furnished the confirmation letter from the Sub-registrar. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the said addition after observing and holding as under:- In the submission made to me by the AR , it is explained that, the transactions represented registration of sale documents in respect of 9 flats and it is further stated that, the AO has wrongly taken it as purchase. In this connection, the appellant approached the sub registrar, who has given copy of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e AO has refused to perform his duty of carrying out investigation/inquiry necessary for the assessment and has also failed to consider the evidences filed by the assessee before him. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant finding given by the AO as well as Ld.CIT(A) and also the material placed on record. All the additions have been made by the AO based on uncorroborated AIR informations. Once such an information was confronted to the assesse, the assessee had duly clarified and explained the entries and the nature of transactions duly supported by books of accounts. Once the assessee has resulted the information, the onus was upon the assessing officer to prove that assessee s explanation and evidences are untenable. The AO has failed to discharge his onus. As regards the addition of ₹ 4.50 crores, the assesse has categorically submitted that the payment regarding development agreement was made through account payee cheques which was duly mentioned in registered documents and in the books of account of the assessee however, the assessing officer without even getting a clarification from the Sub-registrar office has made the said addition. Such an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the assessee company and which funds are held by the assessee company in fiduciary capacity. 14. Brief facts are the issue involved is that, on perusal of the TDS certificates filed along with the return of income, the AO noted that the assesse has received interest of ₹ 3,94,98,940/- from the various banks, but has only offered sum of ₹ 3,88,18,540/-. The AO considering the assessee s clarification, noted that the amount of ₹ 4,06,566/- was on account of interest received on account fixed deposits of society which has not been offered for income. It was explained by the assessee that it had collected maintenance charges as a corpus fund, which was kept as FDRs. Any interest is accrued and does not belong to the assessee and it is not an income of the assessee. The explanation of the assesse that the interest income does not belong to it, was rejected by the AO and accordingly the amount was added to the income of the assesse. This has been confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A) also. 15. Before us, the learned counsel submitted that the amount of deposit received from the customers, who have bought the flat in assessee s project, was kept as trust in a corpus fund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
