9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 110X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id not discern any ratio that section 68 of the Act cannot be applied in case of advances received for plot bookings. If all the ingredients of section 68 exist, nothing would prevent the Revenue from invoking the said provision. With respect to the addition of ₹ 26.32 lakhs confirmed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), we primafacie find that the counsel for the appellant is correct in pointing out that the Tribunal failed to give any finding on this issue. The Tribunal has neither confirmed nor deleted the addition. Let there be NOTICE for final disposal, returnable on 04.10.2017. - Tax Appeal No. 772 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 26-9-2017 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. BIREN VAISHNAV, JJ. For The Appellant : Ms Vaibhavi K Parikh, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) out of the larger additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short). The assessee is in the business of development of real estate. For the assessment year 2008-09, the assessee had filed the return of income disclosing the activity of sale of plots near Nal Sarovar lake at a distance of about 55 kms from the city of Ahmedabad. The assessee had received advance booking payments from large number of individuals and credited a total sum of ₹ 12.11 crores (rounded off) stated to have been received from as many as 2129 persons. Out of such sum, sum of ₹ 87.13 lakhs (rounded off) was returned leaving the net amount of ₹ 11.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the creditors. 4. Before the Tribunal, the assessee produced further material. Such material included further details of some more customers as also, some of the customers in whose cases the amounts were refunded, later on due to cancellation of allotment of plot and in some cases where the sale deeds were already executed on 31.03.2016. Despite objection from the Revenue, the Tribunal took such additional material on record and to the extent the deposits were covered by such further explanation of the assessee, remitted the issue back before the Assessing Officer for conducting verification and taking decision as per law. However, with respect to ₹ 96.60 lakhs (rounded off) which w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner of Income Tax (Appeals) granted substantial relief, thereby bringing down the addition to ₹ 2.52 crores and ₹ 26.32 lakhs. 7. It is true that while confirming the addition of ₹ 2.52 crores, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erroneously recorded that not only nonproduction of PAN, but the assessee was also not in position to produce any other evidence establishing the identity of the investors. This would be opposed to the remand report filed by the Assessing Officer confirming the identity details of the customers even in absence of PAN. However, the Appellate Commissioner's further observations that the assessee produced no evidence whatsoever about the genuineness of the transaction and the cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
