9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 677X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and above consideration have been paid in respect of any property purchased by the assessee. Since the agreement in question is cancelled document and did not relate to the assessee directly or indirectly, therefore, the Assessing Officer has merely inferred that the assessee might have paid some more consideration over and above what is stated in the registered documents. It was merely the suspicion of the Assessing Officer to make addition against the assessee. However, it is well settled law that suspicion, whatsoever may be strong, cannot take place of legal proof. In the absence of any adverse material against the assessee, we do not find any justification to interfere in the order of CIT(Appeals) in deleting the addition. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I. T. A. No 1135 /Chd/ 2013 - - - Dated:- 12-12-2014 - BHAVNESH SAINI AND T. R. SOOD, JJ. For the Appellant : S. K. Mittal For the Respondent : Sudhir Sehgal ORDER Bhavnesh Saini (Judicial Member).- This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Ludhiana, dated September 3, 2013, for the assessment year 2007-08 on the fol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial or any kind of adverse paper have been found for giving any kind of own money. As regard the one of the agreement as per pages 34 and 35 of annexure A-9 it is being submitted that these paper does not belong to the applicant group and also there is no name of the applicant group in this agreement. This agreement also indicates that this is a cancelled agreement wherein there are many cross have been mentioned therein. It is per tinent to mention here that the said document, i.e., pages 34 and 35 have not been confronted at the time of search and also during the post search enquiries. These documents does not pertains to the applicant and we do not know from where this document have been come on my business premises. Therefore from the abovesaid facts and circumstances no adverse inference can be drawn in this regard. Moreover we would also like to mention that on the basis of third party documents in which our company name of their directors name is not mentioned anywhere and the documents is a crossed docu ments and each page is crossed and cancelled. The company recorded the actual amount in the land account as paid to the parties from whom the land was purchased. Out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The sequence of events and the facts of the case are as under : i. The assessee had purchased 46 bigha 9 biswa of land from the following persons : Sl. No. Name of the person Area Amount (Rs.) 1. Munish Kumar S/o Sh Subhash Kumar, Salani Mandi Gobindgarh, Harish Kumar S/o Ram Purti Village Salany Tehsil Amloh. 6 bigha 15,00,000 2. Ram Murti S/o Sh.Raghu Nath, Rajinder Puri S/o Hari Dev Puri Pawan Kumar S/o Madan Gopal Ward No. 11, Mandi Gobindgarh 10 bigha 13,75,000 3. Dilbag Rai S/o Babu Ram Umesh Kumar S/o Jagdish Rai Ramesh Krishan S/o Kishan Lai, Ward No. 7, Mani Gobindgarh 13 bigha 10 biswa 18,42,500 4. Rajinder Puri S/o Hari Dev Puri Prem Chand S/ o Ram Murti Deepak Kumar S/o Ram Murti Pawan Kumar S/o Madan Gopal Mandi Gobindgarh 12 bigha 9 biswa 15,56,500 5. Sumit Gupta S/o Bhola Nath Near Post Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any consideration has been passed over and above the registered consideration. The rate of the land also depends upon many factors and, as such, the whole basis of making the addition by the Assessing Officer is contradictory in the sense that the Assessing Officer has accepted the consideration as mentioned in registered deed in respect of land purchased from Sarvashri Munish Kumar, Ram Murti, Dilbag Rai and Sh. Rajinder Puri and there is no reason not to accept the same consideration of the land purchased from Sh. Sumit Gupta. Besides, that the following facts need to be taken into consideration : a. The sale deed has not been challenged in the sense that it has not been obtained by any fraud. b. There is no evidence that the seller of plot had received any consideration over and above the registered consideration and neither any evidence has been found during the course of search, which was carried out at number of places. c. There is no evidence that there was any physical movement of money from the purchaser to seller. d. The seller had discharged the onus by adducing in evidence that the sale had been executed as per registered consideration and there is no evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessee has discharged the burden of proving the sale consideration as projected in the sale deed-No substantial question of law arises-CIT v. Smt.Raj Kumari Vimla Devi [2005] 279 ITR 360 (All) concurred with.' i. The hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Satinder Kumar [2001] 250 ITR 484 (P H) has clearly held that the Assessing Officer is not competent to make addition in absence of credible evidence, in respect of investment made over and above the consideration recorded, in the sale deed. The headnote of the decision is reproduced hereunder (catchword) : 'Appeal to High Court-Substantial question of law-Search and seizure-Additions to income-Income from undisclosed sources-No material evidence to establish that assessee made investment over and above that recorded in sale deed-Tribunal deleting additions made section 69-Justified-No question of law arises-Income-tax Act, 1961 ss. 69, 260A.' j. Similarly, reliance is being placed on the following judgment of CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh [2009] 309 ITR 233 (Delhi), in which, it has been held as under : 'Capital gains-Computation-Full value of consideration- Expression full v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have any identification of the land proposed to be sold. This means that only a general area of village has been written and no specific property in the said village has been identified in the agreement to sell. The name of the buyer and the seller is specified and the proposed sale consideration has also been recorded as rightly observed by the Assessing Officer, but in the absence of the most important factor, i.e., property to be bought or sold being not identify, the agreement does not lend credence to the rest of the matter. The assessee is neither buyer nor seller of the said of the unidentified piece of the property as per agreement to sell and in the given facts and circumstances of the case as highlighted above, it is highly in proper to adopt the sale consideration on the basis of this agreement to sell. It is also seen that the appellant had purchased the following real estate measuring 46 bigha 9 biswa of land from the following persons : Sl. No. Name of the person Area Amount 1. Munish Kumar S/o Sh Subhash Kumar, Salani Mandi Gobindgarh, Harish Kumar S/o Ram Purti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so as to be taken as the basis of substituting the sale consideration as recorded in the registered deed. In the circumstances the addition made by the Assessing Officer is directed to be deleted. In the result, the appeal is allowed. 7. On consideration of the rival submissions, we do not find any merit in the Departmental appeal. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the copy of the agreement to sell seized during the course of search operation, which has admittedly been cancelled by the parties by marking cross on the same. It is also admitted fact that the said agreement in question did not have any proper identification of the land proposed to be sold. No specific property is mentioned in the said agreement for the purpose of sale. No evidence has been brought on record if the said agreement to sell was acted upon by the concerned parties. The seller to the agreement to sell or the witnesses to the agreement to sell have not been examined either by the search party or the Assessing Officer. The assessee is admittedly not party to the agreement to sell in question and none of the persons related to the assessee-company also connected with the said agreement in question. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
