9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 866X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents found at the business premises could not have been used against the respondent/assessee, i.e., the partner? - HELD THAT:- Tribunal notes that as per the valuation report, the worth of the subject property was Rs. 2.10 crores as on 10.08.2011. Thus according to the Tribunal, it was incomprehensible as to why anyone would pay Rs. 12.75 crores in cash for a property which is worth Rs. 2.10 crores. Given the aforesaid position, apart from other legal aspects which have been touched upon by the Tribunal, we are of the view that no interference is called for. The factual circumstances which have been brought to the fore by the Tribunal do not persuade us to interfere with the order. As regards the other legal aspects which have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ] with regard to the purported cash paid by the respondent/assessee for purchasing 50% of the 10% share held by deceased Kulbir Singh, partner in a firm going by the name Punihani International, can be sustained? 9. It is not in dispute that the respondent/assessee, along with deceased Kulbir Singh, Narinder Singh Punihani and Amarjeet Singh Punihani were the partners in Punihani International. 10. According to the respondent/revenue, Tarlok Singh, i.e., the respondent/assessee, purchased 50% of the 10% share in the immovable property described as F-5, Radhey Mohan Drive, Bandh Road, Gadaipur, Mehrauli, New Delhi-110030 [in short, the subject property ]. 11. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal shows that it proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d hereafter: 12. The alleged document reads as under: We the undersigned legal heirs of late Shri Kulbir Singh Punihani hereby testify that we have examined all the documents in connection with the Farm House situated at F-5, Radhey Mohan Drive, Gadaipur, Mehrauli which originally belonged to Late Shri Kulbir Singh Punihani having 10% share in the said Farm House and found the same correct. And we hereby severally acknowledge to have this day received from Mr. Tarlok Singh Punihani one of the partner of M/s Punihani international a sum of Rs. 8,00,00,000/- (Rs. 8 crores] only for relinquishing 50% share from the aforesaid 10% in favour of Mr. Tarlok Singh Punihani. The details of payment is as follows: Cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount and the amount reflected therein was paid thereafter over a period of time. (iv) The document (we have extracted hereinabove) is an unsigned document. (v) It is crucial to note that as per the AO the respondent/assessee, as noticed above, paid a cash amounting to Rs. 6.50 crores while Narinder Singh Punihani paid cash amounting to Rs. 6.25 crores for acquiring the share in the subject property. The total amount, thus according to the AO, which was paid in cash for acquiring respective shares in the subject property was Rs. 12.75 crores. 16. The Tribunal notes that as per the valuation report, the worth of the subject property was Rs. 2.10 crores as on 10.08.2011. Thus according to the Tribunal, it was incomprehensible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
