9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 585X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were genuinely found to be at ₹ 3 lakhs only as against the inflated amount of ₹ 10 lakhs, therefore, ₹ 7 lakhs shall have to be considered as income from other sources. Since the transaction of sale of furniture etc., was sham and to inflate the value of the furniture etc., to evade stamp duty and evade long term capital gains, therefore, no benefit could be given to assessee on such agreement to sale. The assessee is not able to explain as to for what consideration ₹ 7 lakhs have been received by assessee, therefore, it was correctly treated as income from other sources. - Decided against assessee - ITA.No.7104/Del./2017 - - - Dated:- 6-7-2018 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rpose of agreement was to reduce the stamp duty involved in the transaction. Considering these facts, the transaction of sale of furniture were determined at ₹ 3 lakhs and accordingly, sale consideration of long term capital gains were determined at ₹ 60,10,000/- and the amount of ₹ 7 lakhs was treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. The assessee challenged the addition before the Ld. CIT(A). It was contended before the Ld. CIT(A) that amount was received through cheque against the registered sale deed as also that the sale of furniture and household items for ₹ 10,00,000/- and the agreement was notarized on 19.10.2012. It was also contended that even if the contention of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the submissions made before the authorities below and referred to agreement to sale dated 19.10.2012 (PB-27). Reply filed before A.O. PB-25 and 29. He has submitted that claim of assessee has not been disputed by the A.O. 6. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 7. After considering the rival submissions, I do not find any merit in the appeal of the assessee. It is not in dispute that assessee received ₹ 10 lakhs towards sale of furniture in the house at the time of sale of the property. The assessee stated to have executed agreement to sale the furniture etc., vide Agreement dated 19.10.2012, copy of which is filed in the paper book. The A.O. in order to ascertain the genuineness of the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of furniture etc., are given in the agreement to sale where even number of items have not been mentioned. The list would also support the findings of the A.O. that the value of old furniture etc., would not have exceeded the amount of ₹ 3 lakhs. No evidence has been produced by the assessee to explain that value of the items under sale are more than ₹ 3 lakhs. Therefore, totality of the facts and circumstances of the case clearly prove that the furniture etc., sold by assessee was for ₹ 3 lakhs only, against which, assessee has received cheque of ₹ 10 lakhs. Therefore, the authorities below were justified in considering the addition of ₹ 7 lakhs in the hands of the assessee. Since the agreement to sale was ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
