TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 877
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed its return of income for the A.Y 2012-13 on 28.09.2012 admitting a total income of Rs. 72,02,386. 3. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 27.02.2015 asking the assessee to explain as to why the depreciation claim of Rs. 1,16,00,000 on buildings should not be disallowed as there was no building, but there were sheds only. The assessee was also asked to explain as to why the claim of additional depreciation mentioned in the depreciation schedule should not disallowed and the assessee was asked to produce all the bills/vouchers with regard to the additions to the fixed assets such as buildings and plant & machinery. Assessee was also asked to furnish the breakup of the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is commission paid to agents and the assessee has failed to make the TDS. As regards the computation of long term capital gain on sale of a land, the AO found that the indexed cost of acquisition claimed by the assessee is not correct. According to him, the cost of land disposed works out to Rs. 1,84,404 whereas the assessee has shown an amount of Rs. 2,70,000. He therefore, brought the excess of the amount to tax. Further, he also observed that the assessee has received an amount of Rs. 2,51,00,000 towards compensation by virtue of the arbitration order dated 01.12.2010, but the assessee has shown only an amount of Rs. 1,16,00,000 and the balance amount of Rs. 1,35,00,000 has been shared between two individuals who are directors of the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Rs. 1 ,35,00,000/- 7 The Learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1 ,35,00,000/ - without giving a finding that Shri Harbans Singh and Ms. Taruna Singh are part owners of the property sold. 8 The Learned CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition merely on the basis of payment of Rs. 65,00,000/- and of Rs. 70,00,000/- to Shri Harbans Singh and Ms. Taruna Singh respectively. 9 Any other ground(s) that may be urged at the time of hearing" 6. As regards Grounds 1 to 5 against the deletion of addition made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the CIT (A), we find that he has given relief by following the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Merilyn Shipping & Transport (cited supra). It is the case of the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 24.11.2009 with M/s Sandhya Hotels (P) Ltd (SHPL) (represented by its M.D. Shri S. Sridhar Rao) for development of its property at Ootapalli Village, Shamshabad, Hyderabad and the developer took possession of the land and demolished the structures and poultry sheds thereon. However, thereafter, dispute arose between the owners and developer and the development agreement dated 24.11.2009 was cancelled vide cancellation deed dated 1.4.2011. It was submitted that the Directors of the assessee company, Shri Harbans Singh and his daughter Ms. Taruna Singh, had entered into separate agreements with SHPL for purchase of office units in HUDA Techno Enclave, Madhapur for which they have paid a sum of Rs. 65.00 lakhs and Rs. 70.00 lakhs respec....