Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

The present appeal has, therefore, come up for adjudication before us wherein the limited issue under consideration relates to Ground No. 3 of the assessee’s appeal which reads as under:
“On the facts and circumstances of thecaselearned CIT Appeals was not justified while confirming addition of Rs. 3,26,00,000/- u/s 68 as unexplained cash credit of Income Tax Act, 1961. As per copy of account furnished by M/s U-Turn Housing Pvt. Ltd., it was found that cash payment of Rs. 3,26,00,000/- was made to assessee against purchase of land variousdates. The MOU talks about selling of marketing rights by the assessee company to M/s. U-Turn Housing Pvt. Ltd. in respect of 72,000 sq yards of land which shall include the booking of plots and receiving the payment from prospective customers at the rate of Rs. 1270 per sq yard for a total consideration of Rs. 9.14 crores. Further, on perusal of the MOU, we find that both the parties have agreed therein that the amount to the tune of Rs. 5.69 Crores has already been paid by M/s. U-Turn Housing Pvt. Ltd. prior to entering into such fresh MOU and the same shall be adjusted against the total consideration of Rs. 9.14 crores. The Court of ld. ADJ Jaipur has also taken cognizance of receipt of Rs. 5.69 crores by the assessee company. The said assertion in the MOU has also been confirmed separately by way of annual confirmation statement submitted before the Assessing officer duly signed by Shri Nikhil Tripathi and it is not thecaseof the Revenue that his signature on such confirmation was forged. Further, credit notes are issued by M/s. U-Turn Housing Pvt. Ltd. again signed by Shri Nikhil Tripathi drawing reference to MOU dated 14.07.2007 and stating that sum has been credited in account of the assessee company against sale proceeds of specified plots of land. Further, as we have noted above, the payment of Rs. 3.89 Crores also corroborates with the books of accounts of M/s. U-Turn Housing Pvt. Ltd.
50. In light of aforesaid discussions and in the entirety of facts and circumstances ofcase, we are of the considered view that the statement of Shri Nikhil Tripathi cannot be held as reliable piece of evidence against the assessee company in view of various discrepancies and lack of corroboration as we have discussed above. Further, there is no material on record which can form the basis to hold that the assessee company has received Rs. 3.26 crores in cash from M/s U-Turn Housing Pvt. Ltd. which has not been accounted for in its books of accounts during the financial year 2006-07. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing officer to this effect is hereby directed to be deleted. In the result, ground no. 3 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961—Cash Credit— Assessee filed appeal against the order of Id. CIT(A), the appeal of assessee was heard by the co-ordinate bench and has upheld the respective orders passed by the Id CIT(A). Assessee moved a misc. application that the assessee’s appeal was not decided by the tribunal while passing the order, thereafter, the misc. application was disposed off by the co-ordinate bench vide order dated 03.06.2019 and the earlier order of tribunal was recalled for the limited purpose of adjudication. The assessee was engaged in the business of real estate and filed its return of income on 31.10.2007. Thereafter, on the basis of certain information received by the assessing officer, the case of assessee was reopened after seeking requisite approval and notice u/s 148 was issued on 14.03.2014, in response of the notice assessee filed its return and also requested for the copy of the reasons, which were duly supplied to the assessee. As per the assessing officer, the assessing officer, the assessee has entered into a memorandum of understanding dated 22.03.2006 with M/s U-Turn Housing Ltd. for sale of its land.The assessing officer noted that the cash payment was a part of MOU. As per copy of accounts furnished by M/s U-Turn Housing Pvt. Ltd., it was found that cash payment was made to assessee against purchase of land, but it was found that no such receipts have been declared by the assessee in its books of accounts. Therefore the cash payment was treated assessee’s unexplainedcash credit, by invoking provisions of section 68 of the Act, and the same was added to income of assessee for impugned assessment year. The assessment was accordingly completed u/s 147 read with 143(3) dated 20.03.2015.On appeal of assessee, on the facts and circumstances of the case there was no reliable piece of evidence against the assessee company in view of various discrepancies and lack of corroboration, further, there was no material on record which could form the basis to hold that the assessee company had received cash from M/s U-tern Housing Pvt. Ltd. which has been accounted for in the books of accounts during the financial year 2006-07. Therefore, the addition made by assessing officer to this effect was directed to be deleted. --- Rajasthan Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT. (2020) 23 ITCD Online 16 (JP)