TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 578
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n filing the appeals was due to a genuine inability and due to sufficient and reasonable cause and hence, it was prayed that the delay of 423 days may be condoned, failing which irreparable loss and injury may be caused to the assessee. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. On going through the condonation petition filed by the assessee, we find that there is good and sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the appeals and the delay in filing the appeals is found to be bonafide. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 423 days and admit the appeals for adjudication. 4. The only ground raised by the assessee in ITA No. 400/Coch/2015 is with regard to the sustenance of addition of Rs. 23,42,600/- unexplained investment in the bank accounts. 5. The facts of the case are that the there was information with the Assessing Officer that the assessee had entered into an agreement with Shri Anil Kumar Sharma of Ernakulam for procuring about 13 acres of land in Olavanna village in Kozhikode district on 05/07/2007. As per the agreement, the assessee had to receive Rs. 1,05,000/- per cent for procuring land on behalf of Shri Anil Kumar Sharma irrespective of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....there was no proof that the amounts deposited in the bank accounts were the refunds of the same amounts which had been advanced for purchase of the property. In view of this, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 7. Against this, the assessee is in appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that deposits in bank accounts represented the amounts received from relatives out of their withdrawals from NRE accounts and refund of various land advances on cancellation of deals executed by the assessee on behalf of his relatives. According to the Ld. AR, the declaration and statement filed by the assessee clearly established that the cash deposits in banks were made out of the surplus funds available with the assessee as an agent on behalf of the relatives. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had not been given an opportunity to prove his case. 8. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The main plea of the assessee's Counsel is that originally the amount was advanced for purchase of landed properties by the assessee's relatives out of their NRE bank accounts, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... he had paid an amount of Rs. 4,57,18,050/- @ Rs. 1,05,000/- per cent for procurement of land to various sellers. It was further claimed that the entire money amounting to Rs. 4,57,18,050/- received from Shri Anil Kumar Sharma was paid to the sellers. However, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer from the deed of documents in respect of these property deals that only an amount of Rs. 1,86,66,400/- was actually paid by the assessee to the sellers. It was claimed by the assessee that he had paid sale consideration over and above the value shown in the documents. Since the assessee could not substantiate the claim with supporting evidences, the Assessing Officer brought to assessment the amount of Rs. 2,70,51,650/- as business profit of assessee from the property transactions with Shri Anil Kumar Sharma. 12. On appeal, the CIT(A) observed that except one property, all the properties purchased were registered in the name of Shri Anil Kumar Sharma and the one property which was purchased in the name of the assessee was also subsequently transferred to Shri Anil Kumar Sharma. According to the CIT(A), if the assessee was a trader, the land would have been purchased in his name or in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee had received an amount of Rs. 4,57,18,050/- from various parties. Out of this, the assessee had utilized an amount of Rs.,1,86,66,400/- . The Assessing Officer brought to assessment the balance amount of Rs. 2,70,51,650/- as business profit of the assessee from the property transactions with the parties. Further, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee earned short term capital gain of Rs. 30,34,250/- on the sale of the landed property of 54.75 cents. The Assessing Officer considered the amount of Rs. 3,00,85,900/- as income of the assessee. The CIT(A) considered the assessee as an agent in real estate business and estimated the income of the assessee at 50% of the total money in the bank account which is not correct. Once the CIT(A) has considered the assessee as an agent in real estate business, the income of the assessee cannot be estimated at 50% of the total transaction value. In our opinion, the income of the assessee is to be considered at 2% of the total transaction value of Rs. 2,70,51,650/- at Rs. 45,41,033/- (i.e. after excluding short term capital gain). 16.1 Further, the CIT(A) has considered the short term capital gain on sale of 54.75 cents of la....