9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 2033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had claimed that the cash gifts are from Canara Bank, but before the CIT(A), it was submitted that it was from Axis Bank. Smt. Sulochanamma is proved to be a person with means, and the claim that she has gifted the money to the assessee has been proved. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). - Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed - ITA No. 356/Hyd/2017 - - - Dated:- 28-2-2018 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member And Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Accountant Member For the Revenue : Smt. Komali Krishna. For the Assessee : Shri K.C. Devdas. ORDER Per P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.: This is Revenue s appeal for the A.Y 2009-10, in this appeal, the Revenue has raised the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale consideration of ₹ 63,55,000/-. He observed that the CBI has conducted an investigation into the affairs of M/s EMMAR Hills Township Pvt. Ltd. and connected group of cases and one of its directors, Shri. T. Ranga Rao, had stated that the consideration for the plot was received in cash also of equal amount paid in cheques. Therefore, the A.O was of the opinion that the assessee had paid ₹ 63,55,000/- in cash over and above the official price of ₹ 60,37,250/- paid by way of cheque. A statement was recorded from the husband of the assessee Mr. Siva Kumar Reddy by the CBI, wherein he confessed that he had paid on money to Shri T. Ranga Rao. The A.O therefore, asked the assessee to explain the source for the cash payments. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, Shri T. Siva Kumar Reddy had wrongly submitted that the amounts were drawn from canara bank when in fact these amounts were drawn from the Axis bank account of Smt. Sulochanamma. The CIT(A) accepted the assesee s contentions that Smt. Sulochanamma has sufficient funds to gift to the assessee and held that the assessee has satisfactorily explained the sources for the excess payment of ₹ 63.55 lakhs. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed. Against the relief given by the CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. The Ld. DR supported the order of the A.O and submitted that the CIT(A) has blindly accepted the assessee s contentions in the reply to the remand report that the cash withdrawals were from the UTI bank account of Smt. Sulo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
