9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the cheques were encashed within a period of six months and therefore respectfully following the Tribunal order in Westland Developers case [2014 (12) TMI 254 - ITAT DELHI ] we dismiss the ground of revenue. - ITA No: 2547/Del/2013, ITA No: 2314/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 24-8-2015 - SHRI T.S. KAPOOR AND SHRI C.M. GARG, JJ. For The Appellant : Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Sr. DR For The Respondent : Shri V.S. Rastogi, AR ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER These are cross appeals filed by the assessee and revenue respectfully against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 22.1.2013. The assessee has taken eight grounds of appeal. However at the time of hearing, Ld. AR stated that he will not be pressing ground No. 1,2,3,6,7 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of disallowance of additional payments which is also covered in favour of assessee as demonstrated in assessee s appeal. Ld. DR acceded to the facts of the case. 2. We have heard rival submissions and have gone through the material available on record. We find that assessee is engaged in the business of land development alongwith its various group companies. A search seizure operations was carried on upon assesee its group company wherein various additions were made . We find that similar issues were involved in another group companies of assessee wherein the issues raised in these appeals were decided in favour of assessee by the Hon ble Tribunal. Regarding disallowance u/s 40A (3) the Hon ble Tribunal in the case of Westland Devel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act has been wrongly invoked as admittedly no expenses relatable to the addition has been claimed and the assessee has successfully demonstrated that the payment were reimbursement made by CWPPL. Accordingly Ground No. 4 is allowed. We find that in the present case also the assessee has not claimed any expenses relatable to addition the payments were not claimed as expenditure as is noted by AO in para 4.3 4.4. of his order. 3. Respectfully following the above Tribunal order ground No. 5 of assessee s appeal is allowed. 4. The other issue of additional payments made for purchase of land has been raised vide ground No. 4 and 4.1 whereby the assessee has raised ground that additional payments made by assessee were not claimed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion. On a consideration of the same we arc of the view that since in the facts of the present case the material issue is that the said expenditure was never claimed as assessee's business expenditure the occasion to make a disallowance of the same does not arise. On this fact there is no dispute as admittedly the expenditure was not claimed as an expense by the assessee and consequently has not been routed through its P L Alc. In the circumstances, the occasion to make an addition of the same by way of a disallowance in these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case does not arise. The reasoning and finding given while considering the arguments qua Ground No-4 would fully apply here also. The difference that here the entire amount i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... encashed in less than six months from date of issue and therefore entire addition was deleted. The copy of appeal effect is placed on paper book at page 98. Further we find that a similar issue was also there in a group company namely M/s. Druzba Overseas (P) Ltd. wherein the Hon ble Tribunal vide its order dated 25.2.2015 had dismissed similar ground of appeal holding that the cheques were encashed within a period of six months. For the sake of convenience the relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below. :- REVENUE'S APPEAL 14. As regards ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue relating to deletion of addition of ₹ 26,69,7851- made by the AO on account of interest on PDCs paid out of books of account is concerned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave heard the both parties and perused the relevant record available with us specially the impugned order passed by the Revenue Authorities; Paper Book filed by the assessee, we find considerable cogency in the contention of the Id. Counsel of the assessee that the issue raised in ground no. 1 raised in the Revenue's Appeal is squarely covered by the Order dated 31.10.2014 of the ITAT, Delhi 'C' Bench passed in ITA No. 17561Del12013 (A.Y. 2008-09) in the case of M/s IAG Promoter Developers (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT wherein the Tribunal held vide para no. 3 at page 5 as under:- The CIT(A) directed to recalculate the interest on PDCs and there was a sound logic for such direction. His direction is based on material found and seized ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
