9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecuted by them in the year 2008, as rightly held by the learned CIT(A) and the learned tribunal, A.O. was not justified in making addition on account of investment in purchase of land at Adalaj of ₹ 74,50,000/-. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned tribunal in deleting addition made by the A.O. on account of investment in purchase of land at Adalaj of ₹ 74,50,000/-. No substantial question of law arise as proposed. - TAX APPEAL NO. 898 of 2016 With TAX APPEAL NO. 904 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 12-1-2017 - MR. M.R. SHAH AND MR. B.N. KARIA, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MR M.R. BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE FOR TH EOPPONENT : MR SN DIVATIA, ADVOCATE ORAL JUDGMENT (P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 46,02,780/-. Assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) was passed on 16/12/2010 determining total income at ₹ 2,00,31,830/- making after following additions :- (1) Investment in purchase of land at Adalaj Rs.74,50,000/- (2) Disallowance of interest Rs.73,05,794/- (3) Disallowance u/s.14A of the Act Rs.06,73,251/- 3.02. Feeling aggrieved by the order of assessment, more particularly making addition of ₹ 74,50,000/-, made on account of investment in purchase of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al question of law. 3.08. Similar order has been passed by the learned tribunal in case of co-purchaser of the very land situated at Adalaj, which is subject matter of Tax Appeal No.904 of 2016. 4.00. Mr.M.R. Bhatt, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue has vehemently submitted that the learned tribunal has materially erred in deleting addition of ₹ 74,50,000/- made by the A.O. on account of investment in purchase of land at Adalaj. It is submitted that the original owner Mr.Gandaji Thakore has made a categorical statement before the A.O. that he has received ₹ 2.10 Crores on sale of land at Adalaj, which he has invested. It is submitted that even other co-owners of the said land situated at Adalaj h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 08. It is submitted that as such the assessee purchased the land situated at Adalaj vide registered sale deed dated 8/10/2007, which was executed by the power of attorney one Mr.Abbasbhai, who sold the same in favour of one Mr.Hemendra Shah and from whom the assessee purchased the same. It is submitted that therefore, considering the statement of land owners Mr.Gandaji Thakore and other co-owners, which were heavily relied upon by the A.O., it cannot be said that there is any cogent evidence and/or material to show that the assessee paid ₹ 2.10 Crores to the original land owners Mr.Gandaji Thakore and others. It is submitted that therefore, the learned tribunal has rightly deleted addition made by the A.O. on account of investme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and others and thereafter said Mr.Hemendra Shah sold the said land to the assessee. There is no iota of evidence on record to suggest that the assessee paid ₹ 2.10 Crores to said Mr.Hemendra Shah. Solely on the basis of statements of the original land owners Mr.Gandaji Thakore and others that they received sale consideration from Mr.Champavat, in whose favour sale deed was executed by them in the year 2008, as rightly held by the learned CIT(A) and the learned tribunal, A.O. was not justified in making addition on account of investment in purchase of land at Adalaj of ₹ 74,50,000/-. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned tribunal in deleting addition made by the A.O. on account of investment in purcha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
