2013 (2) TMI 575

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal dated 9.4.2010 raising following questions for our consideration: "(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the addition of Rs.25,58,810/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Appellate Commiss....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to make addition of Rs.25.58 lacs by way of unexplained investment in purchase of land. This was done primarily on the basis of the provisions contained in section 50C of the Act. The assessee vehemently contended that such provision would not apply in case of the assessee being a purchaser. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's version making following observations: "We have considered the riva....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was, therefore, an inference of the AO that assessee paid more consideration as against the consideration shown in the sale-deeds. The learned CIT(A) noted that even if section 50C of the IT Act is not invoked by the AO but the AO has applied its principle. We do not agree with the findings of the learned CIT (A) because ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the cases of Jalaram & Co. and Raicha Naresh Jain (s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the order on record we are of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no error. As already noted, the assessee had purchased 4 different parcels of land for certain declared sale consideration. The Stamp Valuation Authority, however, valued the lands higher than the sale consideration indicated in the saledeeds. Assessee paid up additional stamp duty on such valuation. This by itself would not....