9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 363X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1/5th of total expenditure of Rs. 75,21,500/-incurred otherwise than by crossed cheque. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 56,22,088/- made on account of undisclosed income u/s of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." 2. The relevant facts of the case are that the assessee company is a group company of Suncity Group of companies dealing with development of real estate projects in various parts of India. The group is stated to be involved in conceiving and e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... & 22 by the assessing officer at page 2 of his order. 4.1. Addressing the need and necessity for making the payments in cash of Rs. 72,70,500/- in excess of Rs. 20,000/- the following submissions were advanced on behalf of the assessee:- ".......In the present case cash payment of Rs. 72,70,500/- made in excess of prescribed limits of Rs. 20,000/- were genuine on account of following:- (i) The transaction of land purchase was supported by registered documents which were executed before the Sub-Registrar. (ii) The cash payments were made to those persons to whom payments were also made through account payee cheques and these cheque payments accounts for more than 95% of the total value of transactions. Therefore identity of the persons w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d representative of the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that the issue is fully covered by the order of the Tribunal in the case of Vansidhar Projects and facts are identical. It was further submitted that the inaccuracies in holding that payment in excess of Rs. 20,000/- totaling Rs. 72,70,500/- instead of Rs. 75,21,500/- have been brought out in the impugned order and have not been rebutted by the Revenue. It was also submitted by him that on facts the CIT(A) has been very fair as he has held in para 6.3 that as and when the claim of expenditure would be made by the assessee, the AO would be free to decide about disallowance of the same in accordance with law. Accordingly it was questioned how the Revenue could be aggrieved. 8. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med as expenditure in the year under consideration" is a finding of fact which was not confronted to the AO in the light of multi-faceted arguments advanced. None of these facts are coming out from the assessment order and in the absence of the correctness of the finding available on record being established, we are of the view that blindly relying upon the order of the CIT(A) in the case of the issue being covered by the decision of the ITAT in the case of Vansidhar Projects (cited supra) would not be appropriate. The facts therein would have been to be looked into by the ITAT. Accordingly in view of the above, we are of the view that in the peculiar facts and circumstances, the issue needs to be restored to the file of the AO. The impugne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h were deposited in the Bank at Mathura as and when there was a need. The utilization of the funds was claimed to be thus explained. 11. Considering the explanation the CIT(A decided the issue in the following manner:- 8. "I have gone through the submissions of appellant, the facts on record & contained in paper book and have also perused the AO's order and considered the decision relied upon both by the appellant and the AO. 8.1. On verification of the contention of the appellant company that cash deposits of Rs. 56,22,088 in OBC bank account were made out of cash withdrawals from HDFC bank account is found to be correct. Further the contention of the appellant deserves to be accepted that since both these bank account have been duly in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dition may be upheld. 13. The Ld.AR on the other hand, relying upon the impugned order submitted that the facts demonstrate that the assessee at the relevant point of time effected the withdrawals in one bank account and made deposits in the other as per the needs. The dates were claimed to be reasonably close and the arguments that they were utilized for the purchases made at Mathura is consistently on record. Accordingly relying on the same, it was his submission that ht impugned order deserves to be upheld. 14. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the explanation filed by the assessee before the AO as per para 5.1 extracted in the assessment order demonstrates that the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
