9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver the amount paid to Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. was duly reflected by the assessee in the purchases closing stock. No sales had been made during the year under consideration. It has not been shown to be otherwise. In such a scenario, in our considered opinion, no disallowance is called for. See case of Finian Estates Developers Pvt. Ltd [2012 (6) TMI 705 - ITAT, Delhi] - Decided in favour of assesse. - I.T.A. No. 3062/Del/2012, I.T.A.No. 4059/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 25-3-2015 - Shri G. C. Gupta And Shri T.S. Kapoor JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Pradeep Denodia, CA For the Respondent : Shri P Dam Kanunjha, Sr. DR ORDER Per T.S. Kapoor, AM: These are cross appeals field by assessee and the revenue respectively against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 29.02.2012 The grounds of appeal taken by assessee as well as Revenue are reproduced below: I.T.A.No. 3062/Del/2012 (Assessment Year 2008-09): 1. That the impugned order dated 29.02.2012 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XVI, New Delhi is bad in law and wrong on facts. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... na Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Zenobi Builders Constructions Pvt. Ltd. in I.T.A.No. 1429 and 1430/Del/.2011. iii) M/s. Ethan Estate Developments Pvt. Ltd. in I.T.A.No. 1952/Del/2011 iv) M/s. Red Topaz Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. in I.T.A.No.1501/Del/2011. v) M/s. Fullbright Builders Developers Pvt. Ltd. in I.T.A.No. 1954/Del/2011. vi) M/s. Penthea Builders Developers Pvt. Ltd. in I.T.A.No. 1951/Del/2011. 3. Ld. A.R. further submitted that the lead case decided by the Tribunal was in the case of Finian Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. and in all other cases, this lead case has been followed. It was further submitted that the department has not filed any appeal before Hon'ble High Court against the order of Tribunal in the case of Finian Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. and therefore, the issue has become final. 4. Ld. D.R. on the other hand submitted that the assessee had paid commission and brokerage and it avoided applicability of tax deduction at source as it used the word consolidator instead of broker and Ld.D.R. heavily relied upon the orders of authorities below. 5. Regarding appeal filed by Revenue, Ld. D.R. submitted that the assessee had wrongly claimed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he year, the A.O. disallowed the amount out of purchases. Accordingly, he also reduced the closing stock by a similar amount. The closing stock was thus determined at ₹ 54,03,00,341/-. 24. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee contended that the amount involved was not of ₹ 4,20,15,641/-, since Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. had been paid only ₹ 1,24,33,376/-. It was on this contention of the assessee that the Ld. CIT(A) directed the A.O. to verify the actual amount involved. 25. It has been maintained by the assessee all through that the payment to Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. was on account of transfer of certain rights of Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. in the lands transferred to the assessee and was not toward any services rendered. As a consolidator, Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. was to contact the local farmers in and around Gurgaon, who were willing to sell their land. Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. was making payments from its account to the farmers and thereto have certain rights in the land. On the ultimate transfer of land to the assessee through Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd., the final payment was to be made to the farmers. To ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gent of the assessee, rendering services, for which, the provisions of section 194 H of the Act are applicable and it is correctly applied by the Ld. CIT(A). 27. In this regard, it is seen that clause 3.2 of the MOU between the assessee and Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. makes it clear that Vikram Electric Equipment P. Ltd. or its agent agreed to assign their rights to purchase the land in favour of the assessee. It would be appropriate to reproduce here, the said clause 3.2:- 3.2 In consideration of the consolidator or its agent/nominee assigning its rights to purchase the land in favour of the buyer company and causing the land owners to execute the sale deeds directly in favour of the buyer company, the buyer company shall pay the consolidator such sum as may be mutually agreed. However, it is specifically agreed by the consolidator that no sum shall accrue to it on this account till it procures 27 acres of land for the buyer company (unless the buyer company decides to procure less than 27 acres through the consolidator) and all the issues relating to possession and mutation of such land are settled to the satisfaction of the buyer company. 28. The above clause als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
