9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s therefore, deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 5128/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 17-2-2015 - Shri N.K. Saini And Shri I.C. Sudhir JJ For the Appellant : Sh. SM Reddy, CIT(DR) For the Respondent : Shri Vijay Gupta, CA ORDER Per I.C. Sudhir: JUDICIAL MEMBER The Revenue has questioned first appellate order on the ground that the Learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,13,02,000 made by the Assessing Officer on account of investment from undisclosed sources by holding the same as explained ignoring the fact that the assessee was unable to furnish any sustainable documentary evidence with regard to his contention of being a farmer and his co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name of company was to be registered (mutated) now in the name of Shri S.N.Thakur, director who was having the status of a farmer. The company was engaged in the business of developing a residential township at Vill:Aral, Tehsil Karjat, Distt. Raigarh (Maharashtra) and that was possible only if the agricultural land was converted into agricultural land and there must be at least two directors in the company in the status of farmers. Further, it was in the interest of company that the land should be in the name of two directors. As the assessee was having the status of a farmer and to remove the hurdle for converting agricultural land to known agricultural land, the land which was already in the name of Shri S.N. Thakur was transferred in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the other hand tried to justify the first appellate order and referred the provisions of Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988 and the Fiduciary Under Compensation Act, 1956 and Indian Trust Act. He also placed reliance on the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Ram Richpal (1994)- 209 ITR 658 (All.); ii) CIT vs. Rakesh S. Aggarwal (2010) - 36 SOT 148 (Ahd.); iii) CIT vs. Smt. B. Inderani O.P. Nos. 6628 6702 of 1991 - 27- 9.1994 (Hon'ble Karnataka High Court); iv) ITO vs. Hanuman Prasad Shukla (2010)- 194 Taxman 15 (Del.) (Mag.); v) CIT vs. Abhinash Kant (2011)- 15 Taxman.com 347 (P. .H.C.); vi) CIT vs. Fazilkha Dabwali Tpt. Co. (P) Ltd. (2005) - 144 Taxman 376 (P. H). 7. After having gone through the abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. For a ready reference, the finding of the Learned CIT(Appeals) in para Nos. 6 6.1 of the first appellate order is being reproduced herein under: 6. I have considered the issue and the submissions made by the AR. M/s. KTC Developers Pvt. Ltd. engaged in the business of developing a residential township in Maharashtra, acquired agricultural lands and intended to covert them to non agricultural lands. As per the prevalent State Laws, agricultural lands can be acquired in the name of Sh. S.N. Thakur were transferred in the name of the appellant. That this transfer is without any consideration is evident from the Frokt khat. The value of the land mentioned in the said Frokt Khat was only for the purpose of stamp duty and registra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Directors Sh. S.N. Thakur and the appellant, being consenting party , for a consideration of ₹ 3,80,00,000 out of which ₹ 45.00 lacs each have been received by M/s. KTC Developers Pvt. Ltd. on 20.10.2010 and 23.10.2010 as per the bank statement of M/s. KTC Developers Pvt. Ltd. This fact has been confirmed by the A.O. in the remand report. 6.1 From the above, it is evident that the appellant had not invested any amount for the transfer of agricultural land in his name from Sh. S.N. Thakur, as the land always remained belonging to M/s. KTC Dev. Pvt. Ltd. This is reflected in the audited balance sheet and P L A/c of M/s. KTC Dev. Pvt. Ltd. and the fact of payment of stamp duty and registration fee by the company and receipt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
