TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 5
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting the same as undisclosed investment. 3. Briefly stated facts as observed by the AO are that the assessee had invested a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (by cheque No. 524125) and Rs. 87,000/- (by cheque No. 709002) on 09.02.2005 and 11.02.2005 respectively in booking/advancing against a plot of land, [which is termed as 'Kalibari Lane Project']. According to AO, those cheques were issued from the assessee's bank account with Standard Chartered Bank, Kolkata. As no such investment was reflected in the assessee's relevant balance sheet as on 31.03.2005, the assessee was asked to explain the matter. The assessee vide written explanation dated 27.08.2007 stated that the project was booked in the name of M/s. Capital Construction, a sister concern. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Construction are closely held wherein Mr. Subash Paul is the owner, no formal agreement was made and M/s. Capital Construction did not pass any entry for this transaction. Assessee also confirmed that there was no question of doing any business and/or earning any income out of this booking amount paid during the FY 2004-05. However, according to AO, the said explanation of the assessee does not hold any merit. According to AO, the status of the assessee is a company and it had accepted the fact that it had invested the said amount of Rs. 3,87,000/- to M/s. Capital Construction during the relevant FY 2004-05 and the said investment has not been reflected in its corresponding Balance Sheet for the AY 2005-06 and thus, the assessee had conce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... method of accounting cannot determine the true character of a transaction CIT Vs. MESSRS. SHOORJI VALLABHDAS AND CO (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC). In the present case, the assessee has given advance for the property which was taken over by assessee's sister concern and shown by assessee in its balance sheet and squared up in later year so no addition under section 69B of the Act is sustainable and therefore directed to be deleted. 5. The next ground of appeal of assessee is against the action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the additions of Rs. 3,85,000/- (the correct amount is Rs. 3,55,000/-) to the total income of the assessee u/s. 69C of the Act as undisclosed expenditure. 6. Briefly stated facts as observed by the AO are that out of the total e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....confirmed the action of AO citing the reason that assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the six parties from whom the cash was taken. According to assessee, it had made the payment of Rs. 3,55,000/- to six parties on 3 (three) different dates which were routed through cash book, which is evidenced by receipt of individual six parties. And since there was a condition in the agreement of sale to pay interest on late payment, the assessee incurred the interest expenditure. We note that the AO accepted these facts however he was not satisfied with the cash payment of Rs. 3,55,000/- and made the addition of Rs. 3.55 lakh since assessee failed to produce the parties before him. However, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO on the ....