9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 831X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15/09/2008 and the balance consideration was also received on 19/03/2014 at the time of final sale deed. Thus, the assessee would not have anticipated or predicted the enactment of new provisions of Sec. 43 CA from assessment year 2014-15 while executing the agreement to sell on 10/09/2008 and even the provision of section 43CA (3) deals with such a situation. DR reliance on the decision of Spytech Buildcon (Supra) is unacceptable as facts that pari materia different is that in this case the agreement is supported by the flow of consideration by an account payee cheque and 90 % of the money received in the 5 days of the agreement to sale in year 2008. The bench noted section 43CA provides that when an assets being stock in trade on the date of agreement provided the consideration or a part of it has been received by him on or before the date of agreement. In case the date of agreement fixing consideration and date of registration are different, then for the purposes of determination of value under the section, the value as on the date of agreement shall be considered, provided the consideration or part of consideration is received the value as on the date of agreement shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing of appeal. 2.1 In ITA No. 752/JP/2023, the assessee has taken following additional grounds; Additional Ground No.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without considering the detailed submission made before him on 19/11/2021. Additional Ground No.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 1,26,87,868/- made under section 43CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ignoring the fact that the date of agreement for sale of the immovable property is 10/09/2008, which is much prior to the Assessment Year 2014-15, when the provisions of Sec. 43CA have become effective and, as such, the assessee would not have foreseen these provisions at the time of executing agreement to sell that it has to receive the sale consideration by any other mode other than cash before the date of agreement. Additional Ground No.3 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in not quashing the assessment order on account failure to follow the mandatory procedure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business of construction and real estate and the immovable property sold by the assessee is its stock in trade and not capital asset (thus, section 50C is not applicable) . The assessee has sold the property in question for a value below the value assessed for stamp duty. The agreement as well as the consideration for the property has been done/ received in the preceding year by banking mode (major payment). The immovable asset being held as stock in trade, section 43CA was not applicable considering the fact that the transaction of sale was over in preceding year only. The copy of ledger of customer Mr. Rajendra Kumar Kedia along with the copes of service tax return were kept on record. The turnover shown in the books matches the service tax return. From the details already on record the ld. AO noted that the assessee has received part payment through cheque on 15/9/2008 that is after the date of agreement and on the date of agreement payment of Rs. 1,00,000 was accepted in cash having date 14/08/2008. Further no such payment was mentioned in the copy of agreement furnished the assessee has received part payment other than cash after the date of agreement therefore in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come of Rs. 16,08,560/- for assessment year 2014-15 on 30/09/2014. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS. The assessment stands completed on total income of Rs. 1,42,96,430/-, vide order u/s 143(3) dated 31/10/2016, by making an addition of Rs. 1,26,87,868 under section 43 CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, being the difference in the value/sale consideration of the of property as shown by the assessee at Rs. 1,51,00,000/- and value adopted by the Sub- Registrar for stamp duty purposes at Rs. 2,77,87,868/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Learned CIT(A). the Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, vide order dated 06/12/2023, dismissed the appeal of the assessee without appreciating the facts of the case and the detailed submission made by the assessee. Aggrieved with the order of the Learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. Before discussing the grounds of the case, it would be relevant to discuss the facts of the case in brief hereunder :- BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE The assessee company entered into an agreement on 10/09/2008 with Shri Rajendra Kumar Kedia to sell the immovable prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000) u/s 43CA of the Income Tax Act,1961. No effective opportunity was granted to the assessee for putting the defense. Further the Learned Assessing Officer has also not followed the statutory procedure laid down u/s 43CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), NFAC, vide order appellate order dated 06/12/2023, dismissed the appeal of the assessee, without even considering the detailed submissions filed online by the assessee on 19.11.2021. Aggrieved with the order of the Learned CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. The assessee, while filing of appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal , due to inadvertence, could not take grounds of appeal which go to the root of the matter. Separate application has been filed for admitting the additional grounds. It is submitted that the additional grounds arise out of the order of the Learned Assessing Officer/CIT(A) and do not require any additional evidence. The same are first taken for discussion. Additional Ground No.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Leasing Quota v. Shukla Bros. [2010] (4) JT 35 (SC) It shall be obligatory on the part of the judicial or quasi-judicial authority to pass a reasoned order while exercising statutory jurisdiction. In the absence of a reasoned order, it would become a tool for harassment. (3) S. N. Mukherjee v. Union of India AIR 1990 SC 1984 Keeping in view the expanding horizon of the principles of natural justice, we are of the opinion, that the requirement to record reason can be regarded as one of the principles of natural justice which govern exercise of power by administrative authorities (4) Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. Woolcombers Workers Union AIR 1973 SC 2758 ...The giving of reasons in support of their conclusions by the judicial and quasi-judicial authorities when exercising initial jurisdiction is essential for various reasons. First, it is calculated to prevent unconscious unfairness or arbitrariness in reaching the conclusions. The very search for reasons will put the authority on the alert and minimise the chances of unconscious infiltration of personal bias or unfairness in the conclusion. The authority will adduce reasons which will be regarded as fair ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Adjustment of TDS vide challanNo.48378 dated 20/03/2014 HDFC Bank Thus, the peculiar feature of the case is that 90% of the sale consideration was received within just five days of the agreement executed on 10/09/2008. Thus, it is clear that the agreement to sell was executed on 10/09/2008 whereas the provisions of Section 43CA have become effective from 01/04/2014, i.e. from assessment year 2014-15. The provisions of section 43 CA are quoted below :- 43CA (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of an asset (other than a capital asset), being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any authority of a State Government for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed or assessable shall, for the purposes of computing profits and gains from transfer of such asset, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. (2) The provisions of sub-section (2) and sub-section (3) of section 50C shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to determination of the valu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, is that the provisions of Sec. 43CA are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case and the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in making the impugned addition by invoking Sec. 43 CA. The Learned CIT(A) also erred in sustaining the impugned addition made by the Learned Assessing Officer without considering the facts of the case and detailed submission made by the assessee. The Hon'ble Tribunal is, therefore, requested to delete the addition made by the Learned Assessing Officer and sustained by the Learned CIT(A). The following case-laws are cited in support :- (1) M/s Reegal Construction Vs. ITO (ITAT, A Bench, Kolkata)ITA No.354/Kol/2023 Order dt. 13/07/2023 The Hon ble ITAT by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of PCIT vs. Swananda Properties (P) Ltd. [2019] 111 taxmann.com 94 (Bombay) allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that since the provisions to section 43CA have been introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2014 and the agreement to sell was entered prior to the 1st April 2014 and therefore, the condition of payment or part payment of consideration on or before the date of agreement cannot be imposed ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision in the case of Krishna Enterprises vs ITA No.2133/M/2019 5 ACIT. I am of the considered opinion that the asessees succeeds on both the counts. Hence, I set aside the orders of the authorities below and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. (5) Disha Construction Vs. JCIT 25(2),Mumbai ITAT, D Bench, Mumbai Date Order : 17/06/2021 The Hon ble Tribunal observed that .. section 43CA cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case. By the plain language of this provision it is not retrospective. Thus, there is no statutory provision based on which the stamp duty valuation could have been made a basis in the present case. The ratio of the aforesaid decisions are squarely applicable to the facts of the assessee's case. The assessee had entered into the sale agreement for sale of the immovable property for a consideration of Rs. 1,51,00,000/- on 10/09/2008, i.e. much earlier to enactment of provisions of Sec. 43CA in the statute w.e.f. 01/04/2014 applicable from assessment year 2014-15. Then how the assessee could foresee and visualize these provisions enacted from assessment year 2014-15 at the time of executing the agreement on 10/09/2008. That apa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at 90% of the sale consideration stood received by the assessee within five days of the date of agreement as stated supra. Remaining consideration was also received by the assessee before 31/3/2014. At the time of execution of the agreement, the assessee could not have visualized that a new enactment will become effective from 01/04/2014. It is further submitted that the Learned Assessing Officer has also failed to appreciate the fact that the provisions of Sec. 43CA are pari materia the provisions of Sec. 50 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 except that the provisions of Sec. 50C applies to transfer of a capital asset being land or buildings or both whereas Sec. 43CA applies to transfer of an asset, other than capital asset, being land or building or both. The provisions of Section 43 CA applicable for the year under consideration are quoted below :- [Special provision for full value of consideration for transfer of assets other than capital assets in certain cases. 43CA. (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of an asset (other than a capital asset), being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ( b ) the value so adopted or assessed 51 [or assessable] by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section (1) has not been disputed in any appeal or revision or no reference has been made before any other authority, court or the High Court, the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of the capital asset to a Valuation Officer and where any such reference is made, the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of section 16A, clause ( i ) of sub-section (1) and sub-sections (6) and (7) of section 23A, sub-section (5) of section 24, section 34AA, section 35 and section 37 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), shall, with necessary modifications, apply in relation to such reference as they apply in relation to a reference made by the Assessing Officer under sub-section (1) of section 16A of that Act. [ Explanation 1 ]. For the purposes of this section, Valuation Officer shall have the same meaning as in clause ( r ) of section 2 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957). [ Explanation 2. For the purposes of this section, the expression assessable means the price which the stamp valuation authority would have, notwithstanding anything to the contr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income Tax Vs. Chandni Bhuchar (High Court of Punjab Haryana) (2010) 232 ITR 0510 In the absence of any admissible evidence valuation done stamp duty authorities could not be taken as actual sale consideration and the value shown in the sale deed had to be accepted. (b) There is infringement of right of the assessee on account of failure of the Learned Assessing Officer to refer the case to Valuation Cell During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee, vide letter dated 29/08/2016, had submitted that the immovable property was sold below the stamp duty value adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority. Therefore, in view of the provisions of Sec. 43 CA read with section 50C(2)(a) of the IT Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer was required to refer the matter of valuation of the property to the Valuation Cell before completing the assessment. Having not done so, the Learned Assessing Officer has violated the statutory provisions and mandatory procedure as laid down in Sec. 43CA/50C(2) of ther IT Act, 1961. This has rendered the assessment proceedings invalid. Even in a case where no such prayer for referring the case to Valuation Cell is made by the assessee, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , contemplated under Section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of justice. The legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed merely on the basis of the valuation to be made by the District Sub Registrar for the purpose of stamp duty. The legislature has taken care to provide adequate machinery to give a fair treatment to the citizen/taxpayer. There is no reason why the machinery provided by the legislature should not be used and the benefit thereof should be refused. Even in a case where no such prayer is made by the learned advocate representing the assessee, who may not have been properly instructed in law, the assessing officer, discharging a quasi judicial function, has the bounden duty to act fairly and to give a fair treatment by giving him an option to follow the course provided by law. In the light of discussion made above, the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly observe that the Learned Assessing Officer failed to follow the mandatory procedure laid down in Sec. 40CA(2) with reference to sub-section (2) (3) of Section 50 C of the IT Act, 1961. The Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the aforesaid case of Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal observed that even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prudent buyer and a prudent seller and the rates determined by the State Government for purpose of checking evasion of stamp duty are not a good guide. (iii) Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. R Jawahar (High Court of Madras) 217 ITR 0059 Valuation for stamp duty purposes by the Sub-Registrar of properties cannot be the guiding factor for determining the value of gifted immovable property . Tribunal holding that different between returned value of gift and the value of the Sub-Registrar's is not a deemed gift Finding of Tribunal based on an earlier judgment and also on the fact that considered received by assessee was fair and reasonable No referable question arises. (iv) Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. R Damodaran (High Court of Madras (2001) 247 ITR 0698) Valuation for stamp duty purposes by the Sub-Registrar of the properties cannot be the guiding factor for determining the value of gifted immovable property The re-opening of the assessment was, therefore, invalid. (v) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Krishan Kumar Ors. Rajasthan High Court (2009) 315 ITR 0204 Stamp Valuation Authority s rates of property fixed for purposes of registration of sale deeds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... price for which property was purchased In absence of evidence on record, higher price for sale of land could not be presumed from consideration shown in registered sale deeds and rates of property fixed by Stamp Valuation Authority for registration purposes could not be taken to be price for which property might had been sold There was no justification for AO to estimate selling price of land at Rs. 40 per sq.ft. instead of Rs. 20 per sq.ft. and for CIT(A) to presume selling price at 22 per sq.ft Tribunal committed no error in allowing appeal of assessee Revenue s appeal dismissed. The ratio of these decisions are squarely applicable to the facts of the case. In the case of the assessee, the Learned Assessing Officer failed to refer the matter of valuation to the Valuation Cell as as laid down in Sec. 43CA(2) read with Sec. 50C(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Without referring the matter to Valuation and without bringing any material on record to establish that the assessee had received amount other than the sale consideration as per the sale deed, the Learned Assessing Officer proceeded to make the impugned addition of Rs. 1,26,87,868/-. The aforesaid decisions rendered by va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e days. The delay of just five days is negligible. For all the intents and purposes, the spirit of the provisions of sub-section (3) (4) of Sec. 403CA stands fulfilled. In these circumstances, the value of consideration should have been taken as on the date of agreement and not the value taken by the stamp valuation authority at the time of registration on 21/3/2014. The Learned Assessing Officer should have considered the spirit of the provision, particularly when the agreement was executed on 10/09/2008, much earlier to 01/04/2014, when the provisions of Section 43CA became effective from AY assessment year 2014-15. The registration was done almost five and half years later than the date of agreement whereas 90% of the consideration stood received within just five days of the agreement executed on 10/09/2008. When the facts of the case are taken in totality, the assessee is entitled to relief as provided u/s 43CA(3) (4) of the IT Act, 1961. The Learned Assessing Officer denied the benefit of Sec. 43CA(3) and (4) to the assessee without considering these vital facts. The Learned CIT(A) also erred in sustaining the addition made by the Learned AO without considering the afor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nds taken above and also the submissions made and case-laws cited and decide the appeal in favour of the assessee and oblige. 6. The ld. AR of the assessee has also moved a petition raising the additional ground as the additional ground being technical in nature considering the specific following prayer of the assessee the same is accepted: In this case, appeal for assessment year 2014-15 stands filed on 11/12/2023. However, while filing the appeal, due to inadvertence, following grounds could not be taken. These grounds are purely of legal nature and arise out of the order of the learned Assessing Officer/learned CIT(A). These go to the root of the matter. These additional grounds do not require any additional evidence. Therefore, the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly give permission for taking the addition grounds., which are as under :- Additional Ground No.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without considering the detailed submission made before him on 19/11/2021. Additional Ground No.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s admitted. (v) CIT Vs. Kerala State Co-operative Marketing Federation Learned. (1992) 193 ITR 624 (Ker) An appellant before the Tribunal can raise any new or additional point for the first time in appeal before the Tribunal. (vi) Mahindra Mahindra Ltd. Dy. CIT (2009) 122 TTJ 577 (Mub)(SB) Appeal (Tribunal)-Additional ground-Question of limitation-Special Bench having been constituted for deciding the question of limitation on the request of Revenue, the objection as to raising of additional ground by assessee is not maintainable now Further, there can be no embargo on any party to raise a legal ground for the first time before the Tribunal provided the relevant material for deciding that question already exists on record and no further investigation of facts is required-Question of limitation goes to the very jurisdiction of the matter-It is not only the right of the parties but also the duty of the Tribunal to consider the question of limitation notwithstanding the fact that it is not raised before it-Additional ground admitted. (vii) Sunil Kumar Pugalia (HUF) Vs. ITO (2009) 120 TTJ 1001 (Jodh) Appeal (Tribunal)- Additional ground-Admissibility-Ground challeng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... making an addition of Rs. 1,26,87,868 under section 43CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, being the difference in the value of sale consideration of the of property as shown by the assessee which at Rs. 1,51,00,000/- and value adopted by the Sub-Registrar for stamp duty purposes at Rs. 2,77,87,868/-. This addition made by the ld. AO was challenged before the ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, vide order dated 06/12/2023, dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing that ; From the Assessment Order, it is also clear that the assessee received part payment by cheque on 15.09.2008 i.e., after the date of agreement. The assessee received only cash of Rs. 1,00,000/- at the time of agreement. Therefore in the case of assessee, the provision of section 43CA(1) is clearly applicable. The assessee did not furnish any explanation despite several opportunities provided at the time of assessment. I also do not find that appellant has made any claim before the Ld. AO that the matter of valuation should be referred to valuation officer. Accordingly, I find that the sale consideration of property sold as adopted by Ld. AO at Rs. 2,77,87,868/- based on valuation by the stamp au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the stamp duty value adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority and the agreement to sale was executed by an agreement dated 10/09/2008 and on the date of agreement the assessee has not received any amount by an account payee cheque and therefore, the revenue contended that the provision of section 43CA not applicable. Whereas, the assessee contended the agreement was executed in 2008 and the consideration to the extent 90 % is received by the assessee by an account payee cheque the assessee cannot expect that the law will change and even though the matter of valuation was also not referred to the Valuation Cell of the Department in view of the provisions of Sec. 43 CA(2) read with section 50C(2)(a) of the IT Act,1961. The assessee also contended that no effective opportunity was granted to the assessee for putting the defense and not followed the statutory procedure laid down u/s 43CA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the ld. AO. The ld. CIT(A) does not appreciate the facts available on record, even though the facts were already on record that the assessee has executed an agreement to sell the property in 2008 and the 90 % payment received in within 5 days of agreement and therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e fact that the date of agreement for sale of the immovable property is 10/09/2008, which is much prior to the Assessment Year 2014-15, the assessee would not have foreseen the provision. Even the provision of section 43CA gives exception that if the agreement fixing the value of consideration for transfer of asset and the date of registration of such transfer of asset are not the same, the value referred as on the date of agreement be considered for the payment of stamp duty on the date of such agreement, which in this case is of year 2008. The agreement to sell the immovable property for a consideration of Rs. 1,51,00,000/- was executed on 10/09/2008. Further, 90% of the total consideration was also received by the assessee within five days of the execution of agreement, which is evident from the details of payments as quoted herein above. Thus, the peculiar feature of the case is that 90% of the sale consideration was received within just five days of the agreement executed on 10/09/2008. Thus, the agreement to sell was executed on 10/09/2008 whereas the provisions of Section 43CA have become effective from 01/04/2014, i.e. from assessment year 2014-15. The provisions of section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0% of the sale consideration was received within just five days of the date of agreement on 10/09/2008, i.e. by 15/09/2008 (Rs. 100000 on 14/08/2008 in cash and Rs. 1,34,90,000 through cheque on 15/09/2008). Copy of bank account reflecting the above payment is available on Paper Book Page No. 43-49. Further, the entire balance consideration of Rs. 14,94,000/- was also received on 19/03/2014. Copy of ledger account of the buyer, Shri Rajendra Kedia is available on Paper Book Page No. 51-52. These facts already on record cannot be ignored when even the provision of the law deals with such situation. The assessee would not have anticipated or visualized the enactment of new provisions of Sec. 43 CA from assessment year 2014-15 while executing the agreement to sell on 10/09/2008. The plea of the assessee, therefore, is that the provisions of Sec. 43CA are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case and the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in making the impugned addition by invoking Sec. 43 CA without dealing with the provision of the act read with the facts placed on record. Based on these arguments on facts, to drive home to the contentions so raised that the provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs. Swananda properties (P) Ltd (2019 111 taxmann.com 94 The Hon'ble High Court observed the provisions in the form of Sec. 43 CA has been introduced with effect from 1st April, 2014 and by plain language of this provision, it is not retrospective M/s Spenta Enterprises Vs. ACIT I.T.A. No. 2133/Mum/2019 Order dated 27/1/2022 .I note that this is assessees plea that section 43CA was introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2013 and the agreement under consideration were entered into prior to 31.03.2013. Further, this is assessees plea that difference is only 5% between the ready recokner rate and sale consideration. Hence, this is assessees plea that the same has to be ignored on the touchstone of ITAT, Mumbai decision in the case of Krishna Enterprises vs ITA No.2133/M/2019 5 ACIT. I am of the considered opinion that the asessees succeeds on both the counts. Hence, I set aside the orders of the authorities below and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. Disha Construction Vs. JCIT 25(2),Mumbai, ITAT, D Bench, Mumbai, Date Order : 17/06/2021 The Hon ble Tribunal observed that .. section 43CA cannot be made applicable to the facts of the present case. By the plain lang ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he final sell deed also has reference to the same consideration that has been flowed in 2008 and based on that agreed rate the sell deed is executed. The provision of section 43CA(3) already dealt with the exception and therefore, we found merits in the facts that the assessee has agreed by an agreement to sell the property at predetermined price at Rs. 1,51,00,000/- and the consideration to that has been flowed for an amount of Rs. 1,35,90,000 and a sum of Rs. 1,34,90,000 received by a banking challan. Based on that set of facts provision of section 43CA(3) clearly attract and thus, the addition of Rs. 1,26,87,868/- is vacated. Since we have considered the additional ground no. 2 raised by the assessee the other grounds raised by the assessee becomes educative in nature. Based on the above observation the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 752/JP/2023 is allowed. In ITA No. 753/JP/2023 9. In this appeal the assessee has challenged the levy of penalty of Rs. 41,16,578/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the act on account of the addition of Rs. 1,26,87,868/- made u/s. 43CA of the Act. Since the bench has deleted the said addition in ITA NO. 752/JP/2023 being the quantum appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
