TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1191
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. 2.00. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgement and order dated 26/2/2016 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "C" Bench, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned tribunal"), passed in ITA No.290/AHD/2012 for A.Y. 2008-09, revenue has preferred Tax Appeal No.898 of 2016 with the following proposed substantial question of law :- "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition made on account of investment in purchase of land at Adalaj of Rs. 74,50,000/-?" 2.01. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the learned tribunal in ITA No.291/AHD/2012 for A.Y. 2008-09 with respect to another assessee but co-purchaser, revenu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8/- out of total interest disallowance of interest of Rs. 73,05,794/- and deleted the balance interest expenses of Rs. 24,30,996/- 3.05. Aggrieved with the order passed by the learned CIT(A), both revenue and assessee filed appeal before the learned appellate tribunal. 3.06. That the learned appellate tribunal vide order dated 26/2/2016 allowed the appeal of the assessee and directed the A.O. to delete addition of Rs. 48,74,798/- made on account of disallowance of interest expenses. The learned tribunal dismissed the appeal preferred by the revenue against the order passed by the learned CIT(A) deleting addition made by the A.O. on account of investment in purchase of land at Adalaj of Rs. 74,50,000/-. 3.07. Feeling aggrieved and d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and others for purchasing the land vide registered sale deed dated 8/7/2007, and the assessee has also shown his one half share of Rs. 32,32,825 in the balance sheet. It is submitted that therefore, the learned tribunal has materially erred in deleting addition made on account of investment in purchase of land at Adalaj of Rs. 74,50,000/-. Making above submissions it is requested to admit both these appeals. 5.00. Both these appeals are vehemently opposed by Mr.S.N. Divedia, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee. It is submitted that even considering the statement of land owner - Mr.Gandaji Thakore it can be seen that said Mr.Gandaji Thakore made a statement that he sold land situated at Adalaj to one Mr.Champavat for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatements of the said of original land owners - Mr.Gandaji Thakore and others, which Mr.Bhatt, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue has placed before this Court for its perusal, it appears and it is not in dispute that as per the statements of said Mr.Gandaji Thakore and others, they received Rs. 2.10 Crores by way of sale consideration from one Mr.Champavat and they executed sale deed in the year 2008. However, it is required to be noted that so far as the both the assessee are concerned, they have never purchased the land situated at Adalaj from the original land owners - Mr.Gandaji Thakore and others. As per their case and even sale deed produced on record, both the assessee purchased the land from one Mr.Hemendra S....