9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... care by the revenue. Accordingly, the addition amount is quashed. Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 265/Asr/2022 - - - Dated:- 15-5-2023 - DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : None. ( Written submission ) For the Respondent : Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT. DR ORDER Per Anikesh Banerjee , JM The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),-5Ludhiana,[in brevity the CIT (A)] order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Income Tax Act 1961[in brevity the Act], for A.Y. 2017- 18.The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld.JCIT (OSD), Central Circle-1, Jalandhar, [in brevity the AO] order pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness Complex. The assessee's claim was that the entire transaction amount was paid through HDFC Bank bearing a/c no 50200013186245. But the assessment was completed with an addition amount of Rs.50 lac. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the ld. AO. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. 3. During the hearing the ld. AR filed a letter and prayed that the adjudication may be completed on basis of their written submission. The ld. AR depicted the fact of the case in the written submission. The specific paragraph of the submission is reproduced as below: OUR SUBMISSIONS Sir, it is submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings u/s 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ual payment for purchase of property was for Rs.31,50,000/- as Rs.2,50,000/- was self cash withdrawal which was mistakenly included in purchase of property and this Rs. 2,50,000/- should be added to cash in hand). The copy of Balance Sheet which was filed during assessment proceedings along with bank statement is enclosed herewith. Sir, Ld. AO stated that assessee company has made a payment of Rs. 50,00,000/- in cash for the purchase of property situated as 213-214, AGI Business Complex, Jalandhar which is reproduced on page 3 of the Assessment Order and to substantiate the same AO relied on photocopy of unregistered agreement found and seized from the business premises of Sh. Gundeep Singh which is reproduced on page 4-8 of the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om situated as 213-214, AGI Business Complex and made payment of Rs. 31,50,000/- through HDFC Bank account no. 50200013186245, the detail of payment is stated above. 2. That Sale deed is duly registered on 07.08.2019 and the copy of registered deed is uploaded herewith. 3. That the property was purchased by the assessee on the circle rate/ segment rate prevalent at the time of registration. 4. That the registry charges was paid from bank account of assessee company i.e. Jove Enterprises through account no.50200013186245, the copy of bank statement is uploaded herewith. 5. That Ld. AO relied on the photocopy of unregistered agreement. 6. That during assessment proceedings Ld. AO provided photocopy of the alleged unre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no evidence against assessee company that the huge figure whatever be its quantum over and above the figure booked in the record and accounts changed hands between the parties. 13. That without prejudice to the above it is stated that, on perusal of the alleged photocopy of agreement and registered deed it is clearly visible that the signatures of Authorized Signatory i.e. Sh. Vinod Bhalla are not same and they are forged. 14. That agreement to sell is not treated as the transfer of the title of the immovable property. Thus, the agreement found in the residence of the Sh. Gundeep Singh has no value in the eyes of law. 15. That the registered sale deed results in the transfer of the asset. Thus, the deed was executed by the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lacs on 29.07.2016 and Rs. 40 lacs on 01.07.2016) as per the said agreement. Notice u/s 153C was issued by the AO concerned on the basis of said information and assessment was framed by the AO by treating the said payment of Rs. 50 lacs in cash as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AR in his grounds of appeal has inter-alia raised the following issues: (1) That the assessee had made a payment of Rs. 34 lacs as advance to Sh. Gundeep Singh through bank transfer. (2) No cash payment of Rs. 50 lacs were ever made by the assessee to Sh. Gundeep Singh. (Payment of Rs. 50 lacs in cash) A perusal of the agreement to sell reveals that though an amount of Rs. 34 lacs has been paid by bank transfer but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
