TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 743
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....In short the 'Act') dated 23.03.2016 framed by ACIT (Central)-2, Indore. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Learned Assessing Officer in sustaining the addition of Rs. 17,00,000/- on account of brokerage, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2.The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said grounds of appeal. Additional Grounds: 1.On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Learned Assessing Officer in sustaining the addition of Rs. 17,00,000/- on ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rprises (a firm of Doshi Group) and late Maharani Laxmi Kumari. The assessee stated that for this land deal he was to receive a brokerage of Rs. 27,00,000/-. He further stated that out of this Rs. 27,00,000/-, Rs. 5,00,000/- has been received through cheque during financial year 2008-09, Rs. 5,00,000/- was further received through cheque during financial year 2009-10 and Rs. 10,00,000/- was received in cash during financial year 2013-14 and all these receipts have been offered to tax. The balance of Rs. 7,00,000/- has not been received till date. Though it was contended that the assessee shows income on cash basis but Ld. A.O was not satisfied and he after considering the submissions made by the assessee concluded that Rs. 17,00,000/- has n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt years when they were received. Rs. 7,00,000/- is still outstanding and in case if it is received the same would be offered to tax. 9. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the order of both the lower authorities. 10. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. As regards the legal ground raised by the assessee which we have admitted for adjudication in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd V/s CIT 229 ITR 383 (supra), we on examination of the records observe that during the course of search certain documents were been seized which have been referred by the Ld. A.O in para 8 of the assessment order. During the course of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he search & seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act in your case it was noticed that you along with one Sanjay Badjatya had brokered the land dealing at Narsingh Kothi, Kanadia Road, Indore between Late Maharani Smt. Laxmi Kurnari and M/s D.S. Enterprises, a firm of Doshi group. In reply to Q. No. 4,5,6,7 of your statement recorded on 28/2/2014 u/s 132(4) of the Act, you have stated that an amount of Rs. 27, 00,000/- was received by you as brokerage. You are requested to explain as to why this amount of Rs. 27, 00,000/- should not be treated as your income and why addition of Rs. 27,00,000/- should not be made for the F.Y. 2008-09 (A.Y. 2009-10). 12. The assessee gave following reply to the above said query:- Reply: It is correct t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y pursue this matter with the late maharani & ultimately I could received Rs. 10 lakh out of Rs, balance Rs. 17 Lakh in august 20\3. J may add that the balance Rs. 7 lakh has not been received by me hither to; hence there is no question of taxing the receipt of Rs, 7 lakh in my hand, as J am offering income by way of brokerage & commission on cash basis since last more than 25 years. In nutshell, I may state that J was to get brokerage of Rs. 27 Lakh but out of this amount I have received Rs. 20 Lakh till now & same has been offered for taxation as under 1.5,00,0001- (A.Y-2009-10) 2.5,00,000/- (A.Y-2010-11) 3.10,00,000/- (A.Y-2014-15) As the balance Rs. 7 Lakh has not been received by me so far, ....