TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (6) TMI 598
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Rs.23,65,688/- on grossly ignoring the fact that appellant had not claimed such cost of construction as revenue expense, rather had capitalized it to the closing work in progress. 3.0 The Ld. CIT(A), before confirming the additions of Rs.23,65,688/- ought to have appreciated the fact that: a) The entire payments were made through banking channel by A/c. payee cheque; b) The appellant had deducted TDS on contracts and deposited in time to the credit of Central Government; c) The confirmation of account had been filed on record; d) The bills, Sales Tax registration numbers, Ledger A/c. of such suppliers and bank statement had been filed on record; e) The Ld. A.O. had not rejected appellant's books of accounts; The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing." The ld. AR has very fairly stated before us that he would be agitating only ground nos. 1 & 2. Ground no. 3 is only in addition to the abovesaid grounds. As such, we are only adjudicating grounds nos.1 & 2 together. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave been upheld by the ld. CIT(A) as well on the ground that none of the parties had neither a PAN card nor any other details for the purpose of cross verification to prove the genuineness of the transactions. The ld. CIT(A), while upholding the findings in verbatim, also observed that the assessee had failed to produce the new addresses of the said parties. In this regard, the findings arrived at by the ld. CIT(A) are contained in para 5 of the impugned order dated 27-11-2009. It is in this view of the matter that the assessee has raised the instant grounds before us. We also find it relevant to mention here that along with the instant appeal, the ld. AR has also filed paper book comprising documents at serial nos.1 to 5 with necessary certification. Opening the arguments, the ld. AR appearing for the assessee contended that in the instant case the notice in question dated 3-12-2008 (copy produced before us today) provided too short a time to the assessee to prove the genuineness of the transactions in question. The said notice was received on 4-12-2008. Since the time provided to show cause was too short, therefore, the assessee, who is an old lady, could only produce the e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dence in support, the case in hand is only regarding factual verification of the payments made. So, in the fitness of things; in our opinion, we deem it appropriate to remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh affording adequate opportunity to the assessee. ITA No.900/Mum/2010: 6. This appeal has been filed by the department against the order of ld. CIT(A). The Revenue in its appeal has raised the following grounds : "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the CIT(A) is opposed to law and facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.70,86,956/- being payment made to a third party because there was no privity of contract in respect of such payments. because there was no privity of contract in respect of such payments. 3. The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the alleged payments represented bogus/fictitious transaction and was not allowable as business expenses because Shri Mehta was not the original tenant. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ehta as landlord and tenant, her appeal has been wrongly accepted by the ld. CIT(A). He prayed that the instant ground be accepted. Findings of the ld. CIT(A) to this effect may be set aside thereby the addition made by the ld. AO be upheld. On the other hand, the ld. AR appearing for the assessee has referred to the paper book comprising of the entire record of the case which has been filed separately in the instant appeal. He drew our attention towards the rent receipts of Shri Sachdeo upto the year 2000. Stated that undisputedly Shri Sachdeo was the assessee's tenant from the year 1950 to 2000. It was in the year 2000 that Shri Sachdeo inducted Shri Mehta as sub-tenant. As a result, since 2000 till the Agreement of surrender of tenancy dated 22-10-2003, Shri Mehta was the assessee's tenant. The agreement of surrender of tenancy in this regard is a duly registered Agreement under the provisions of Registration Act before the Registrar. He further contended that all the details of Shri Mehta are there at page 24 and details are on the record. He further elaborated the fact that whether it is Mr. Mehta or Mr. Sachdeo is a fact immaterial for deciding the issue of business expend....