2021 (1) TMI 887

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....irming the addition of Rs. 26,50,000 invoking section 69 of the Incometax Act, 1961 [the Act] without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case as regards the source of payment which was paid through the Bank account. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee purchased a property situated at No 20 (old No 25 & 30) 5th cross, 1st Main, Chamarajpet, Mysore Road Cross, Bangalore, for a sum of Rs. 34,50,000. For the purchase of the same he had sufficient and adequate source of income from which the payment of Rs. 26,50,000 was made. Hence it was stated that the tax liability corresponding to the addition of Rs. 26,50,000/- is not justifiable under law on mere notion that the property is not shown in the balance sheet da....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion while declaring long term capital gain from the said acquisition of the property and offered the same for taxation. However, the AO without considering the amount received by the assessee on acquisition of the said property by Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (BMRCL), made addition u/s. 69 of the Act on account of purchase of property by the assessee vide Sale Deed dated 12.3.2012 for which the assessee paid consideration of Rs. 34.50 lakhs as under:- a) Rs. 9,50,000 by cheque bearing No.389248 dated 15.11.2011 drawn on 1C1CI Bank, N.R. Road Branch. Bangalore. b) Rs. 25,00,000 by DD/PAY ORDER bearing No.010577 dated 11-1-2012, drawn on 1CICI Bank, N.R. Road Branch, Bangalore. 7. In our opinion, the source of p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... compensation received in respect of award or agreement which has been exempted from levy of Income Tax vide section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act Shall also not be taxable under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 even if there is no specific provision of exemption for such compensation in the Income Tax Act, 1961." 11. The ld. DR submitted that assessee has not submitted any proof that the land is acquired by Metro Railway Authorities. He submitted that though CBDT Circular No.36/2016 mandates that compensation received by the land owners for acquisition of land under the RFCTLAAR Act is exempt from tax, however, assessee has not produced the proof with reference to the same. He therefore supported the order of the CIT(Appeals). 12. We ....