Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (2) TMI 860

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dispute that the amount was in fact received by the assessee. Given these circumstances, that the Satisfaction Note, prima facie, recorded that the owner of the property was B.L.Goel (assessee’s father) and that the amount was received by the assessee on the father’s behalf cannot be determinative in the facts of this case. Since the amount was received, as a matter of fact, and the books of the purchaser showed that a fraction of that sum was disclosed as sale consideration, the Revenue was entitled to issue notice to the respondent, ascertaining whether such amount was actually received by him and, if so, on whose behalf, and proceed further. Thus the ITAT’s order narrowly confirming the invalidity of the notice of the assessment, tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ivalik, New Delhi. The receipt stated as follows: That the total deal has been settled/fixed between me and purchaser at ₹ 33,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs only) and the balance payment of ₹ 16,50,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) shall be paid by the above said purchaser to me, as per the terms and conditions of the agreement to sell dated 8.6.99 3. The searched parties, i.e. the two Batra brothers, partner of M/s Om and S. Constructions had secured the roof rights and disclosed the consideration of ₹ 4 lacs as to the amounts indicated in the receipt. Mr.B.L.Goel, the assessee s father was the Power of Attorney holder of the original owner Mr. B.B. Bhagat, on the basis of a document executed i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as recognized the assessee s father Shri B.L.Goel as the owner of the property as also the seller of the property. Once the Assessing Officer has recognized the existence of Shri B.L.Goel to be the owner as well as the transferor of the property and the fact that the assessee herein has transacted on behalf of Shri B.L. Goel, then obviously the liability if any could rest only in the hands of the owner being Shri B.L.Goel. Thus, it is found that the satisfaction as recorded by the assessing authority did not specify that any undisclosed income belonged to the assessee herein but only specified that the issue needed further investigation. It is further noticed that the search in the Batra s case in the course of which the alleged receipt has .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... iminary ground itself and have held that the assessment is bad in law, we are not expressing any views on the other grounds as raised in the appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue urged that given the nature of the receipt which nowhere mentioned that the amount was received by the assessee on behalf of his father, the contentions made in the proceedings were unwarranted. It was urged that, in the answer to the queries put, at one stage, the assessee denied having executed the receipt, nonetheless he admitted to the signatures and further voluntarily informed that he had received the amount on behalf of his father. Highlighting that the Revenue is not expected to make a detailed enquiry and investigation before issuing a Satisfactio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at ₹ 4 lakh only. It is also not in dispute that the amount was in fact received by the assessee. Given these circumstances, that the Satisfaction Note, prima facie, recorded that the owner of the property was B.L.Goel (assessee s father) and that the amount was received by the assessee on the father s behalf cannot be determinative in the facts of this case. Since the amount was received, as a matter of fact, and the books of the purchaser showed that a fraction of that sum was disclosed as sale consideration, the Revenue was entitled to issue notice to the respondent, ascertaining whether such amount was actually received by him and, if so, on whose behalf, and proceed further. 7. In the circumstance, this Court is of the opinion .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates