9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich was shown in the excel-sheet to the effect that the same was actually paid by the assessee to the developer. Even otherwise, the concurrent findings returned by the CITA and ITAT are that the document found from the premises of the third party namely excel-sheet, which is the basis of the proceedings was without any signature and there is no corroborative material to substantiate the said document - Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.R. For the Respondent Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT DR. ORDER PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (in short Ld. PCIT ), Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad vide order dated 07.03.2024 for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- 1. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by Ld. Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-1 u./s 263 of the Income tax Act is ab initio void being bad in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Pr. CIT erre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the assessee and his co-purchaser have paid this sum to Mr. Rajan Shah. The assessee submitted / explained that he has paid a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- to Mr. Rajan Shah and the balance sum of Rs. 52,00,000/- was paid by the brother of the assessee. 4. However, the PCIT was of the view that as per information gathered during the course of search operation / post search operation, the assessee has paid a sum of Rs. 55,00,000/- as on-money to M/s. Navratna Organisers and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (in short NODPL ) for purchase of immovable property being unit No. 608 in the scheme called Kalhaar Blues and Greens . Accordingly, the PCIT was of the view that the Assessing Officer has erred in not verifying the information, with the submissions of the assessee. The PCIT observed that the searched party Navratna Developers has itself deposed before the Income Tax Settlement Commission that it has received on-money from purchasers of units and therefore, the Assessing Officer ought to have made addition of Rs. 55,00,000/- on account of on-money paid by the assessee. Accordingly, the PCIT held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer proposed to make an addition of Rs. 55,00,000/- as cash on-money paid by the assessee to Navratna Organisers and Developers Pvt. Ltd. towards purchase of immovable property. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that on perusal of the aforesaid notice dated 07.03.2022, it is evident that there is no incriminating material on which the Assessing Officer is placing reliance upon to come to a finding that the assessee has paid on-money to Navratna Developers towards purchase of immovable property. The Counsel for the assessee thereafter drew our attention to draft order of the Assessing Officer (at Page 94 of the Paper Book), in response to which the assessee filed another reply dated 17.03.2022 (at Pages 97-108 of the Paper Book) in which the assessee specifically submitted that there is no incriminating material whatsoever to come to a finding that a sum of Rs. 55,00,000/- was paid as on-money by the assessee to Navratna Developers towards purchase of immovable property. In the said letter, the assessee had requested the Assessing Officer to give details of any incriminating material whatsoever, which would suggest that the assessee had paid on-money towards purchase of immova ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- in cash towards purchase of immovable property. Fourthly, the assessee had made a specific averment that the excel sheet found during the course of search pertains to period 2008-2013 and hence the contents of the excel sheet have no bearing for the impugned period under consideration. Therefore, in view of the present facts, placed before us, we are of the considered view that there is no adverse incriminating material in possession of the Department specifically mentioning payment of Rs. 55,00,000/- as cash on-money payment towards purchase of immovable property. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts, we are of the considered view that there is apparently no lack of enquiry by the Assessing Officer on the issue of on-money payment of a sum of Rs. 55,00,000/- towards purchase of immovable property, and secondly the order passed under Section 263 of the Act by Ld. PCIT has not given any specific findings as to where the Assessing Officer is wrong in passing the assessment order. Therefore, looking into the instant facts, we are of the considered view that the assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In the recent case of PCIT v. Ka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
