9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vesaid lands and invested the funds received from its holding company in the inventories and the inventories were actually acquired by the assessee in FY 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 and assessee has carried on the above inventories until the current assessment year without there being any movement.
Since the funds were invested in earlier assessment year and also assessee has shown the source of the above funds, there is no requirement for initiation of section 68 under the present circumstances.
We observed that the transaction under consideration is made by the assessee section 68 cannot be invoked - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inventories as asked for in the format vide questionnaire dated 12.12.2019 whereas the assessee was also asked to furnish particulars of sale deed in respect of these inventories and source of purchase. Further assessee was asked to provide the current status of the inventories but no particular reply was submitted but since there was no change in the inventory it can be assumed no change was also made in the alteration/modification made in the inventories. In order to verify the same, several notices u/s 142(1) were issued to the assessee, the assessee could not provide copies of sale deeds in respect of inventories reflected in its Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2017. However, in the submissions dated 17.12.2019 and 19.12.2019, assessee furnished copy of deeds in respect of purchase of inventories/ immovable properties. The details of inventories are reproduced in para 12 of the order. After considering the above list, Assessing Officer found that assessee did not provide sale deed of properties at Village Kodliaball/Bejai Church, Mangalore (Area 0.1279 acres) with purchase price of Rs. 2,48,94,564/- and Village Kodliaball/Bejai Church, Mangalore (Area 0.0325 Acres) with purchase pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That, the Appellant had discharged its onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction by furnishing the detail of advance as received from Emaar, its address, PAN, Collaboration agreement with Emaar, confirmation from Emaar and Income Tax return of Emaar. Hence, all necessary detail and evidences have been duly filed and furnished. 6. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer/NFAC has erred in passing the impugned assessment order without giving the assessee any show cause notice and reasonable opportunity, thereby violating principles or natural justice. 7. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC has erred in ignoring and not admitting the Rule 46A application as preferred by the Appellant. 8. That, in view of the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer/ NFAC has erred in not appreciating that Section 115BBE is not applicable, 9. That the explanations given, evidence produced and material placed and made available on record have not been properly considered and judicially interpreted. The observation/addition made is unjust, illegal arbi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Rs. 2,48,94,564/- in Village Kodialbail/Bejal Church in State of Karnataka. It was submitted that at the time of purchase of land, there was certain additional costs, such as, mutation, brokerage, legal fees, etc. which are attached with the actual cost of the land in order to transfer the land property in compliance with the rules and regulation framed by the respective states. The assessee has submitted details of inventories of Rs. 70.64 crores and reinstating the abovesaid additional cost as under :- Land Registry No. Registry Value (A) Stamp papers (B) Mutation (C) Brokerage (D) AI (E) Legal Expenses (F) Total of Land Cost (G) Remarks 3908 5,71,20,000 53,69,280 57,120 11,42,400 - 1,10,029 6,37,98,829 3905 5,13,18,750 48,23,970 51,319 10,26,375 - 98,854 5,73,19,268 3904 1,07,10,000 10,06,740 10,710 2,14,200 - 20,630 1,19,62,280 3906 58,01,250 5,45,330 5,801 1,16,025 - 11,175 64,79,581 Refer Para 2 3907 49,80,15,000 4,68,13,410 4,98,015 1,99,20,600 6,31,999 9,79,312 56,68,58,336 Total 62,29,65,000 5,85,58,730 6,22,965 2,24,19,600 6,31,999 12,20,000 70,64,18,294 And also submitted as under :- "On perusal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has declared equivalent liabilities in its Balance Sheet of Rs. 70,73,56,622/-. During assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer through section 142 (1) notice directed the assessee to furnish the details of abovesaid inventories listed in the Balance Sheet. The assessee has submitted list of inventories which was reproduced by the Assessing Officer in his order and based on the details of documents furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer found that Item No.3 & 5 of inventories for which assessee has not submitted any supporting documents. Since assessee has failed to furnish the same he proceeded to make the addition u/s 68 of the Act. Assessee has submitted additional evidences under Rule 46A before the ld. CIT (A) and furnished the relevant document of Item No.5 and also submitted mistake in details of inventories furnished before the Assessing Officer in Item No.3 of value of Rs. 2,48,94,564/- which is nothing but the additional expenditure incurred by the assessee towards mutation, brokerage, legal fees, etc. which the assessee has to apportion the same to all the other inventories/land purchased by the assessee. For that purpose, assessee had submitted revised s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
