2017 (9) TMI 179

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... a total income of Rs. 17,07,868/-. The return was initially processed under section 143 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called "the Act"). The AO received AIR information regarding investment of Rs. 42,52,000/- by the assessee towards purchase of property at Khurja on 16/09/2004. As the assessee had not disclosed any such investment in the property, the assessing officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act. The AO proposed to make addition under section 69B of the Act on the amount allegedly invested but not recorded in the books of account. The assessee responded that the assessee had purchased the land vide registered sale deed dated 16th of September 2004 for Rs. 7,70,000/- whereas the value as per the circle rate wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uthority who deleted the addition. Now the Department has approached the ITAT and has challenged the deletion of addition by the Ld. CIT (Appeals). 3. At the outset, the Ld. authorised representative submitted that the application filed under Rule 27 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules filed by the assessee was not being pressed. We accordingly dismiss the application filed by the assessee. 4. The Ld. departmental representative read out extensively from the order of assessment and vehemently argued that the assessing officer had made elaborate enquiries from the local property dealers and based on the information so gathered it was conclusive that the rate of the property in that area was much more than that mentioned in the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....duty. The Ld. authorised representative submitted that under section 69 B of the Act, addition can be made by the AO only if it has been found by the AO that the assessee has spent an amount in the acquisition of any property which more than the amount recorded in the books of account but such finding of the AO must be based on concrete material which would suggest that such an amount has been spent over and above the consideration recorded in the books of account. The Ld. authorised representative also submitted that before taxing any person it is to be shown to the assessee that he fell within the ambit of the charge in the section by clear words used in the section. It was submitted that no one can be taxed by implication. The Ld. author....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as worked out by the registration authorities and the value of purchase as declared by the assessee can at best be a starting point for any further inquiry/investigation but cannot be the sole basis for any addition. The Ld.CIT (Appeals) has also pointed out that the AO has not proved any underhand dealing and, therefore, the addition was not tenable in the hands of the assessee purchaser. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has also observed that in case of difference there was a specific provision contained in section 50C of the Income Tax Act which applied to the seller and that the AO would be advised to ensure that application of section 50C was made in the case of the seller. This being the factual position and the legal position which has been luc....