9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 1122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Tax Appellate Tribunal [ITAT] in ITA No. 4430/DEL/2016 in respect of the assessment year (AY) 2010-11. 2. The said appeal was preferred by the Revenue impugning an order dated 23.05.2016 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)] in Appeal No. 67/2013-14, whereby the appeal preferred by the Assessee against the assessment order dated 26.03.2013 was partially allowed. 3. On 28.02.2024, this court had admitted this appeal on the following question of law: "A. Whether the ITAT on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 7,73,74,500/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of violation of Section 40A (3) of the Act?" 4. The controversy in the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hasing the two floors (first and second) of the subject property. 7. Aggrieved by the said decision, the Revenue had preferred the aforementioned appeal [ITA No. 4430/DEL/2016] before the learned ITAT. 8. The learned ITAT found no fault with the decision of the CIT(A) in finding that the acquisition of the two floors of the subject property was in the nature of investment and not in the nature of stock-in-trade. The relevant extract of the decision of the learned ITAT is set out below: - "9. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. It could be seen from the record that the disallowance was made by the learned AO u/s 40A (3) in respect of the cash component of the advance amount paid for purcha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge no.17 whereas Schedule 'G' showing the property now under consideration is at page no.22. These documents clearly establish that it is not an afterthought for the assessee to show that relevant property was acquired not as stock in trade but as an investment. The balance sheet prepared more than one year prior to the search is clearly establishing the same. 11. In the light of the evidence above, we do not find any reason to hold that the impugned order suffers any illegality or irregularity. We uphold the same and find the appeal of the assessee as devoid of merits. Appeal is accordingly dismissed." 9. It is the Revenue's case that the finding of the learned CIT(A) and the learned ITAT are erroneous in as much as the Assessee has in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
