9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y cash of ₹ 33 lakhs to the assessee. Therefore, no credence could be given to the seized/impounded paper because it did not contain any specific thing against the assessee. The seized document is not reliable as it was not supported by Sh. Ravinder Singh in his statement, if any, cash of ₹ 33 lakhs have been paid to the assessee. Thus, there is no basis or material available on record to justify the addition of ₹ 33 lakhs in the hands of the assessee. The authorities below thus, were unjustified in making addition of ₹ 33 lakhs in the hands of the assessee as unexplained rental income received for the above property. We, accordingly, set aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the entire addition. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome along with copy of the rent agreement in favour of the assessee prop. of Hotel Tripti has already been placed on record. All the transactions of Hotel Tripti with M/s Chak De Hospitality Private Limited have been duly shown in the regular books of account maintained by the assessee and duly offered to tax in the respective year. It was submitted that it is important to mention that the said captioned page was signed by Mr. Ravinder Singh who is the Director of M/s Chak De Hospitality Private Limited. Therefore, independent inquiry may be made directly from him. The AO, however, noted that explanation of the assessee is not convincing. As per document, it was seen that total rental amount per month is ₹ 5,25,000/-. As per copy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee and had paid rent as well as rent security in cash amounting to ₹ 33 lakhs which has not been disclosed by the assessee. On page no. 6, four months security rent shown at ₹ 21 lakhs from which it is clear that rent for 1 month was ₹ 5,25,000/- and not ₹ 2,50,000/- shown by the assessee. On the same page it has been mentioned that cash rent security shown at ₹ 33 lakhs. This clearly shows that the rent decided was ₹ 5,25,000/- per month which comes to ₹ 63 lakhs for 12 months. Out of this ₹ 63 lakhs, ₹ 30 lakhs for 12 months was received through cheque and the balance of ₹ 33 lakhs was received in cash as advance rent which was not offered for taxation. The AO, accordingly, n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to be quashed. The assessee also challenged the addition of ₹ 23,10,000/- on account of undisclosed rent. 5. We have heard Ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the material on record. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before authorities below as well as referred to impound documents and statement of Sh. Ravinder Singh recorded by the AO and submitted that no evidence was found that assessee received ₹ 33 lakhs in cash as advance security rent. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 6. It is not in dispute that no search was conducted in the case of the assessee. No document was found during the course of search to connect the assessee with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6.03.2013. Copy of which is filed at page 55 of the PB in which he has admitted that he was looking after administrative work of M/s Chak De Hospitality Private Limited and good time hotels. He has explained that rent for the premises have been given at ₹ 2,50,000/- per month and also paid rent security of ₹ 21 lakhs and advance payment ₹ 16,08,716/- which is not returned to them. He has admitted that the seized papers belong to their company and signed by him, containing the transactions upto 20.03.2011. As regards the payment of cash security of ₹ 33 lakhs, he has explained that presently he was not able to explain it and will explain later on but subsequently no other statement was recorded. On the face of this st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contain any specific thing against the assessee. The seized document is not reliable as it was not supported by Sh. Ravinder Singh in his statement, if any, cash of ₹ 33 lakhs have been paid to the assessee. Thus, there is no basis or material available on record to justify the addition of ₹ 33 lakhs in the hands of the assessee. The authorities below thus, were unjustified in making addition of ₹ 33 lakhs in the hands of the assessee as unexplained rental income received for the above property. We, accordingly, set aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the entire addition. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee also argued that initiation of the proceedings u/s 153C of the Act are illegal and bad in law bec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
