9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 859X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unts as an afterthought of the assessee and hence we do not find any reason to interfere in the decision. Decided in favour of revenue. Ownership of two immovable properties - HELD THAT:- Cash book submitted by the Ld. AR could not be relied upon on the issue of receipt of advance from Mr. RP Naidu who also happened to be the power holder of the vendor. Hence, we find the cash book of the firm M/s. AR Builders could not be relied upon on the cash payments made by the firm towards purchase of the land from Mr. RP Naidu - sources for the cash paid for the purchase of the land has not been properly explained by the Ld. AR and we hereby uphold the order of the Ld. AO on this ground for the limited amount where the balance paid towards the registration charges has been demonstrated by the Ld. AR. We therefore partly allow the ground raised by the Revenue on this issue. Short term capital gains - Year of assessment - DR argued that the assessee has sold one acre of property / land on outright basis and has entered into a development agreement with M/s. MVV Builders for the construction of flats - HELD THAT:- Since the transfer as defined U/s. 2(47) of the Act has not taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at of the firms in which he is a partner. Subsequently a notice U/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued on 3/10/2011 and duly served on the assessee. In response, the assessee filed his return of income on 19/12/2011 admitting a total income of Rs. 6,57,000/-. Subsequently, the case was taken up for scrutiny and notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In response, the assessee s Authorized Representative appeared from time to time and furnished the information called for by the Ld. AO. Considering the information furnished and the material available on record, the Ld. AO concluded the assessment by making the following additions: (i) Unexplained money found in the possession of assessee Rs. 12,00,000 (ii) Unexplained investment in purchase of property at Pendurti Rs. 43,59,500 (iii) Short Term Capital Gains Rs. 99,00,500 (iv) Additional profit Rs. 1,99,510 (v) Unexplained credits in various bank accounts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lely on the issue that the amounts have been repaid by the consideration was received by the assessee in his individual capacity as part performance of contract U/s. 2(47) of the IT Act and also when the final order of the Hon ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 3/3/2016 on the Writ Petition No. 32622/2011 filed by the petitioner assessee as regards the possession of subject properties was decided in favour of the petitioner assessee. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) ought not have given relief in respect of unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 54,89,800/- into bank account as since the assessee failed to prove the nexus between the cash withdrawals from bank and the subject cash in absence of maintenance of books of accounts. 5. With respect to Ground No.2, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a Real Estate broker earning income from commission by way of cash. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee has received advances from his customers for identifying and buying a property for one of his customer and hence carried the money from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam when he was intercepted by the DDIT (Inv.) in Visakhapatnam Airport. The Ld. AR further submitted that since the pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from any person and has also denied to give any detailed sources for the seized amount. The assessee also in response to Q.No. 16 has voluntarily agreed to pay income tax both in his name and in his wife s name. The Ld. AO observed in para 2.1 that after repeated opportunities provided to the Ld. AR of the assessee, the assessee filed a letter dated 5/11/2012 that the seized amount of Rs. 12 lakhs is appearing in the books of accounts. The Ld. AO found that since the assessee has not maintained any books of accounts and has accepted that he has not maintained any books of accounts at the time of interception as well as during the survey action, production of books of accounts after a period of 3 months is an afterthought of the assessee and hence the Ld. AO did not consider the books of accounts submitted by the assessee. We find that the Ld. AO has rightly considered the issue of submission of books of accounts as an afterthought of the assessee and hence we do not find any reason to interfere in the decision of the Ld. AO and we hereby set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this ground. Accordingly, Ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is allowed. 7. With respect to Ground No.3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es by way of cheque for registering the documents on 29/4/2010. Further, we find that the partnership firm M/s. AR Builders has paid a cheque of Rs. 15 lakhs for each document by way of cheque to the power holder of the vendors. The payment of cash of Rs. 15 lakhs for each for the two documents was also mentioned in the copies of the sale deed submitted before us. However, the cash book submitted by the Ld. AR could not be relied upon on the issue of receipt of advance from Mr. RP Naidu who also happened to be the power holder of the vendor. Hence, we find the cash book of the firm M/s. AR Builders could not be relied upon on the cash payments made by the firm towards purchase of the land from Mr. RP Naidu. We therefore are of the considered view that the sources for the cash of Rs. 30 lakhs paid for the purchase of the land has not been properly explained by the Ld. AR and we hereby uphold the order of the Ld. AO on this ground for the limited amount of Rs. 30 lakhs where the balance of Rs. 13,59,500/- paid towards the registration charges has been demonstrated by the Ld. AR. We therefore partly allow the ground raised by the Revenue on this issue. 9. Ground No.5 is with respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 97, confirmations received from M/s. MVV Builders against the payments and receipt of advances. Further, from the submissions made by the Ld. AR the Appellate Authority under A ndhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Inams (Abolition And Conversion Into Ryotwari) Act, 1956 , the Revenue Divisional Officer [RDO], Visakhapatnam has directed to issue Ryotwari Patta in the name of the assessee and others vide his order dated 8/1/2018. The Ld. AO has also produced copy of Ryotwari Patta issued in the name of the assessee for the two acres of land owned by him. These additional evidences further strengthen the argument of the Ld. AR that the transfer of property has not taken place in the impugned assessment year. We therefore are of the considered view that since the transfer as defined U/s. 2(47) of the Act has not taken place during the impugned assessment year, the computation of short term capital gains does not arise and the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly directed the Ld. AO to delete the addition of Rs. 99,00,500/-. We therefore find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and do not wish to interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 11. With respect to Ground No.6 regarding une ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
