TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 292
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of appeal:- 1. Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,21,671/- made under section 14A r.w. rule 8D of the Act without examining facts that for maintaining shares and mutual funds assessee has to made some expenses i.e. telephone for sale and purchase, uses of stationary, uses of vehicles and staff, but no expenses was shown in respect of Shares and mutual funds? 2. Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 70,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without examining facts on file and fact that assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the persons from whom credit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wance observing that assessee had not claimed any expenditure which can be related to the investment activity of the assessee. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee himself has disallowed in the computation, the electricity expenses, fee and taxes, insurance, water and sewerage charges etc. That the expenses claimed by the assessee in the computation of income are audit fee of Rs. 16,854/-, bank charges of Rs. 16,391/-, legal expenses of Rs. 10,000/-. No other expenses have been claimed by the assessee in the computation of income. Further, that no interest expenditure has been claimed by the assessee. The total dividend income earned by the assessee is Rs. 51,988/- only, therefore, no disallowance u/s 8D(2)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish the necessary confirmations from such persons with copies of the agreement, ITRs and balance sheets, copy of the relevant bank account from where, such advances had been received and further to prove the identity, credit worthiness and genuineness of transaction. The assessee filed the confirmation in the above said cases with the PAN numbers of the payers, but no ITR return and other details were filed. It was requested to the Assessing Officer to call for the requisite information u/s 133 (6) or u/s 131 and accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued summons u/s 131 to the parties asking them to file the copy of the ITR returns, balance sheet, bank statements. In response to the said notices....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been advanced to them had been filed. It is also brought out in the assessment order that the Assessing Officer issued summons u/s 131 to those persons / parties and in response to that, sought some information with regard to ITRs, balance sheet and confirmation of such transactions as claimed by the assessee and in para 3.4 of the order, the Assessing Officer has mentioned as under:- "All the above persons namely M/s Radhey Terra Private Limited, Shri Chanpreet Singh and Shri Inderjeet Singh have furnished the information. Perusal of information filed by these persons reveals that creditworthiness is proved to pay the amounts to the assessee" 5.4 All such persons with regard to certain enquiries made by the Assessing Offi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and hence, the addition of Rs. 70,00,000/- as made by the Assessing Officer deserves to be deleted." 11. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the CIT(A), the Revenue has come in appeal before us. 12. The Ld. DR has submitted that though the assessee had pleaded that the aforesaid amount was received as advance against sale of property, however, the assessee could not produce any written agreement for sale of the property with the aforesaid proposed purchasers. Further, that the assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the aforesaid creditors. 13. The Ld. counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, has submitted that identical additions were made into the income of the assessee by the Assessing Officer in the case of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). The order of the CIT(A) on this issue is upheld. 15. Ground No.3: Vide ground No.3, the assessee has agitated the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 80,79,409/- added by the Assessing Officer on account of Long Term Capital Gains on sale of land. The assessee during the year sold the agricultural land situated at village Birmi. The assessee claimed the same to be rural land situated beyond 8 KMs from the Municipal limit, hence, not falling under the capital assets exigible to Long Term Capital Gains. However, the Assessing Officer relied on the report of the Inspector obtained in relation to the sale of some part of land in financial year 2010-11 re....