9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Delhi (in short "the Tribunal"): "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct. in law in holding that there was no evidence on record to establish or to draw a reasonable inference that the amount of Rs.35 lakhs was received by the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that only the amount which is submitted to have been actually received by the assessee during the year can be considered without doubting that the amount actually agreed to be paid to the assessee was Rs.35 lakhs? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was generated through writing horse racing and card playing. It was further stated that a total sum of Rs.33,00,000 was settled for vacating the premises. Rs.2,00,000 were received in the shape of bank drafts. The first instalment of Rs.5,10,000 was received in cash. The Assessing Officer included Rs.35,00,000 in the income of the assessee. The amount so received was made exigible to tax as business receipt for giving up a source of income. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (in short "the CIT(A)"). The addition was reduced to Rs.33,00,000 by the said authority. Against the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal deleted the entire amount treating the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , on the other hand, submitted that there was no definite material placed on record by the Revenue to show that the amount related to surrender of a source of income. On the contrary, the materials placed by the assessee clearly indicated that the amount was received for surrender of tenancy. We find that the case of the Assessing Officer was that the building was used commercially for earning profits. The agreement to vacate and receipt of money was pursuant to the stand taken before the rent control authorities that the premises were used for commercial purpose. The receipt had all the ingredients of a commercial transaction and was distinguishable from mere surrender of tenancy rights. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also note ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f answering the questions, we direct that the Tribunal to rehear the matter. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Coming to the appeal, we find that the deletion of penalty was primarily on the ground that the addition made has been deleted by the Tribunal in the quantum appeal. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal also considered the fact that the assessee was under a bona fide belief that the amount was received on a surrender of tenancy rights and, therefore, was not taxable. Learned counsel for the Revenue, on the other hand, pointed out that the stand of the petitioner has been varying from time to time and in fact one of the partners had taken a false plea that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
