9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 580X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... copy of the agreement as proof of the transaction. The revenue authority had not verified the purchaser of the property M/s R.K. Associates, Grain Market, Tanda, Distt., Hoshiarpur. In our opinion, the primary evidence, and party who paid the cash to the assessee for purchasing the land before the Bench, was unable to submit any registered deed related to transfer of property. As per the ld. Sr. DR, the total transfer of the land is incomplete without a registered deed of the property. But the ld. Counsel argued that the source of the cash was proved on basis of this transaction. In any case, we are set aside the issue to ld. AO for verification to the purchaser of the property M/s R.K. Associates. The issue should be disposed off accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction. 2) That the sanction given by PCIT dtd 27-03-18 ,only after going thru reasons recorded only as mentioned in approval letter, ignoring that no document is available in the file for verification and for giving approval u/s 151, hence sanction tantamount to mechanical in nature, invalid jurisdiction and bad-in-law. 3) That the revenue wrongly ignored the unregistered agreement tosell is not an evidence to a contract. 4) That the Ld. AO and CIT(A) ignored the following points , while framing the assessment resulting the assessment as bad-in-law a. That appellant received Rs. 49,80,000 ( as per registered power of attorney in the court of law dtd.18-11-10 and on the basis of agreement to sell on non-judicial stamp pap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s reopened u/s 148 and the total addition was made for depositing cash Rs.25,63,000/-. The assessee filed the return but had not disclosed the deposit of cash in the return of income. During assessment the assessee took the plea that the said amount was accumulated for the sale of land. But the assessee was unable to produce any instrument related to proof of sale of land. In evidence the assessee submitted registered power of attorney and agreement before the revenue authorities. But the instrument like power of attorney and agreement are duly not accepted by the revenue as there genuinity in question, accordingly the addition was made by total deposited of cash. The assessee filed an appeal by challenging the order of the ld. AO by both l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vs. V.R Somasundram Ors. (SC) [ Refer Para-16,reproduced as under] Civil Appeal No. 3192 of 2010 Copy enclosed at page 232 to 237 That appellant received Rs. 49,80,000 ( as per registered power of attorney in the court of ' law dtd.18-11-10 and on the basis of agreement to sell on non-judicial stamp paper of rs. 2,000/- dtd 18-11-10 ) during the year but revenue made addition of Rs. 25,63,000 only and left balance rs. 24,17,000/- for the reasons best known them. Argument: (i) Refer PB-15 onwards for agreement to sell dtd. 18-11-10 and Para-21 onwards for registered power of attorney dtd. 18- 11-10 in English translation. (ii) Total area as per agreement to sell is calculated as under: a) Total ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apital gain was also declared by the assessee. It is observed that the assessee did not file copy of sale deed executed in the subsequent year to prove the sale of land. Further, as per annexure 4 the assessee has filed computation of income of Smt. Tajinder Paul Kaur for Assessment Year 2012-13. As per this document date of filing the return is 31.08.2012 however, there is no acknowledgement No to prove that the return of income for A.Y. 2012- 13 was filed by the assessee wherein Long Term Capital Gain was declared. Another important factor to be noted is that in the calculation entire sale of consideration of Rs. 1,51,06,000/- has been considered in the hands of Smt. Tajinder Paul Kaur, whereas, there were many other co-owners who had sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
