TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (11) TMI 835
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a Return of Income [ROI] on 9.2.2009 declaring total income of Rs. 2,51,560/-. Search and seizure proceedings u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short] were carried out at the residence of Shri Murlidhar Sharma and Shri Gautam Sharma on 15.12.2009 during which certain documents belonging to the assessee were found and seized. On examination of these seized documents, it was found that some papers belonged to Smt. Jiya Devi Sharma, the assessee before us. After recording satisfaction note on 18.8.2011, in the case of the searched persons, that is, Shri Murlidhar Sharma and Shri Gautam Sharma regarding initiation of action u/s 153C of the Act in the case of this assessee, a notice u/s 153C o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....details like the names of the persons to whom these payments were made, whether any TDS was deducted or deposited, ledger account of the expenses, nature of work, whether payment was made in cash or by cheque. Therefore, he has disallowed 50% of the claim resulting into an addition of Rs. 21,14,745/-. 3.2 The case of the assessee in this regard is that the assessee had claimed this expenditure in her original return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act and the same was allowed. It was stated that u/s 153A, there is no basis to reject the genuine expenditure claimed by the assessee. it was stated that the assessee, vide letter dated 30.11.2011, had submitted information in relation to the land development expenses claimed in connection with Vaibhav ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ating evidence by way of bills or vouchers has been submitted either during the assessment proceedings or during the appellate proceedings to justify this claim of expenditure. In our considered opinion, this addition is not warranted because it is beyond the scope of provision of section 153A of the Act because this expenditure had been claimed even in the original return and was rightly allowed. There is no material to deviate from the earlier finding and holding it ingenuine. The assessee did not get this work done through any sub-contractor. Therefore, no question of deducting any TDS. Moreover, there is no specific objection made by the A.O. regarding any particular expenditure. The A.O. has accepted the expenditure in principle and in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ound to be incurred as investment in purchase of house and beyond that there is no evidence. The assessee claimed that the above investment of Rs. 1,26,000/- was made by the assessee, though the same was not appearing in the balance sheet but it is submitted that no addition can be made as the investment in the said plot was made out of savings. Alternatively, it was submitted that in any case, if at all any addition was required to be made, only the amount of investment amounting to Rs. 1,26,000/- could have been treated as income of the assessee. The DLC value of the land could not be adopted for the purposes of considering the investment in the land. There is no provision like 50C for considering the sale consideration in section 69/69A.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icultural lands purchased are required to be converted into the residential and only thereafter, the same becomes tradable commodity. Until the agricultural land is converted into urban land after obtaining permission u/s 90B and after payment of conversion charges etc., the agricultural land, cannot partake the character of stock in trade. The payment made towards purchase of agricultural land is an asset until the same is converted. The unconverted agricultural land cannot be regarded as a revenue expenditure. He relied on the decision in the case of Kanshiram Madan Lal Vs. ITO [1983] 3 ITD [Del] 290. 5.3 We have heard rival submissions. Both parties have reiterated their old stand. We have found that the payment to agriculturists were m....