9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Rao And Honourable Smt Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa For the Petitioner : N VIJAY For the Respondent : None ORDER PER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO Heard learned counsel for petitioner Sri N.Vijay and Smt. M.Kiranmayee, Standing Counsel for Income Tax. 2. The bone of contention appears to be is Rs. 50.00 lakhs, which according to the petitioner, was received as refundable se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the sum of Rs. 50.00 lakhs received by the petitioner was held to be revenue receipt and brought to tax as income for AY 2019-20 under the head "Income from other sources". The said amount is to be treated as income of the petitioner having been received and consumed as undisclosed receipt. The petitioner did not disclose the same in the books of accounts as a liability and it was on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. Then clause 40 reads that it was agreed between the parties that the aforesaid interest free refundable security deposit of Rs. 50.00 lakhs paid by the developer shall be repayable to him by the owner within two months after handing over of commercial units completed in all respects. 5. Thus, it is discernable from the aforesaid Development Agreement that the disputed amount of Rs. 50.00 lakh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
