TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1728
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer-10(3)(2), Mumbai [AO] u/s 143(3) read with Section 147 on 30/03/2013. The assessee has raised 8 Grounds in all out of which Ground Numbers 1 & 2 are not pressed and Ground Numbers 7 & 8 is consequential and general in nature. Ground Numbers 4 to 6 are supportive of main Ground No.3. The only effective Ground No. 3 reads as follows:- 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), erred in confirming the addition on account of alleged unexplained expenditure in lands u/s.69C of the Act, ignoring the explanation of seized material and appellant's reliance of various decisions. It is prayed that the addition on account of alleged unexplained expenditure of Rs. 1,01,25,000/- may be deleted." 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly by Virendra Jain, Gaurav Jain and Dilip Dherai. As per evidences gathered during search, Dilip Dherai was found to be managing and handling the entire land acquisition operations for MSEZ and outside MSEZ which was popularly known as OMSEZ. The land outside MSEZ was purchased in the name of numerous Private Limited companies numbering more than one hundred which were called as land companies by the group. The assessee was one of such land companies for which land outside MSEZ was acquired. 2.4 Upon perusal of Page No. 22 & 23 of loose paper folders referred to as Annexure-1 seized from Dilip Dherai, it was found that the assessee made unaccounted cash payment towards acquisition of land in Vangni TT Village. The assessee's proportiona....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve confirmed that cash payments have been received from the appellant company over and above the cheque payments declared in their books of account. Since the Ld. AR of the appellant has failed to submit any documentary evidence to rebut the entries of seized papers and statement recorded during the course of search of Shri Dilip Dherai, therefore, the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs. 1,01,25,000/- u/s 69C of the I.T.Act is upheld and the grounds of appeal no.(c) & (d) are dismissed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. The Ld. Counsel for assessee [AR], at the outset, submitted that identical additions were made in the case of several other entities. However, all these additions have been deleted by this Tribu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was Rs. 45 lakhs and paid tax thereon. In view of vendor's statement, the AO made an addition of Rs. 39 lakhs to the income of the assessee towards unexplained investment. The action of the AO was justified and the additions were confirmed. Thus in view of the aforesaid decision, in the present case, one of the sellers have been examined by the AO to strengthen his views that cash has been paid over and above the registered amount. There is not even a single document/evidence of parties involved in the sale of land at different villages brought on record to show that an amount other than the payment of consideration has exchanged hands. No confession from the sellers have been brought on record. The entire additions have been made merely o....