Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (6) TMI 1111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m. It is a fact that the Assessing Officer has assessed the income on sale of the land in the hands of the firm where the partners are not sharing the profits equally. The addition made by the Assessing Officer has not on sound footing. The same is hence deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Member And Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Ms Nupur Shah, A.R For the Revenue : Shri O.P. Sharma, CIT,D.R ORDER PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax,(Appeals)-I, Ahmedabad [Ld.CIT(A) in short], dated 18/10/2013 arising in the matter of Assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein- after referred to as "the Act") dated 30/12/2011 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2010-2011. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in allowing the appeal partly. He ought to have allowed the appeal fully in accordance with the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant before him. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n project of Shree Krishna corporation. 2.5 The relevant entries as recorded by the AO are detailed as under: Date Particulars Amount(Rs) 11-09-09 Received from partner Vikasbhai Brijeshbhaim Deepakbhai USC K 2100000 09-10-09 Received from Partner Vikasbhai, Brijeshbhai, Deepakbhai-USC K 900000 2.6 In view of the above, it is clear that the assessee has made contribution amounting to ₹ 9 lacs for the samarpan project. Hence the Ld. AO made the addition of ₹ 9 lacs to the total income of the assessee. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT-A. 3. The assessee before the Ld.CIT (A) submitted as under: (i) The Uma shakti corporation got an opportunity to buy a piece of land bearing survey no. 1004 in August 2009. The partners of the firm thought to start a new project on this land. (ii) Immediately the firm got an offer from Shree Krishna Corporation to start the project in JV with 50-50 ratio together. It was also decided to contribute 1.5 crores by December 2010. (iii) Payment of land was made by the main partner Shri Bhagwanbhai K Patel from the extra collection from the member of USC kalol project. Any partner made no pers .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... made out of the unaccounted collection of the firm M/s USC. 4.4 If the five individual partners would have collected the money out of their resources, then the profit should have been taxed in the individual hands of the partners, not in the hands of the firm USC. Finally, Ld. CIT-A held that investment was not made out of the unaccounted funds. 4.5 In the present case, the AO assessed the income from the sale of land in the hand of the firm where the partners are not sharing the profit equally. Accordingly, the Ld.CIT (A) deleted the addition made by the AO. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. The Ld. AR before us at the outset submitted that the impugned issue is covered in favor of the assessee by the order of this tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Bhagwan bhai Karmanbhai Ajara in ITA 1373/AHD/2013 vide order dated 12-04-2017. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR before us submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee has no bearing on the income tax proceedings. 7. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that the issue raised by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r and submission of the 'A.R. of the appellant carefully. It is seen that the Assessing Officer has not accepted tlie contention of the appellant that the cash amounting to ₹ 9,00,000/- represented on money collections of the firm from Kalol Project. He has held that the investment noted in the diary written by Shri Bhagwan K. Ajara seized at Annexure-A-1 represented unexplained cash deposited by the appellant. This contention of the Assessing Officer does not appear to be sound. In view of the fact that the investment for purchase of the land named Samarpan Project amounted to ₹ 45,00,000/- after it. was sold toM/s. Shree Krishna Corporation. The profit from the transactions had been declared in the hands of M/s, Uma Shakti Corporation which has been accepted by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings of M/s. Uma Shakti Corporation. It is also seen that the total funds contributed in cash amounted to ₹ 45,00,000/- was by five partners who contributed ₹ 9,00,000/- each whereas the firm M/s. Uma Shakti Corporation has the following partners : Sr.No. Name Share 1. Shri Vikas Ramchandra Patel 10% 2. Shir Bhagwan Karamanbhai Ajar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates