TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 89
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of Section 37(1) Of the income tax act, 1961 on account of additional payment in violation of stamp DutyAct,1899, 3 The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that consequent to search action at the premises of BPTP Group, assessment under section 153C read with section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was completed on 31/12/2009 in the case of assessee. Aggrieved with additions made, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal') raising the grounds as reproduced above. 3. Before us, the parties appeared through Videoconferencing facility. 4. At the outset, the learned Counsel of the assessee submitted that both grounds are covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Tribunal in the case of the assessee itself. The Learned DR could not controve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee and made addition of Rs. 3,30,81,969/- for interest on PDC observing as under: "2.6 So keeping in view the business model/modus operandi of the BPTP Group as is clear from the seized material as discussed above, it is proved beyond any iota of doubt that the assessee has paid cash interest to the vendor(s) on the amount of PDCs @ 1.25% per month (15% per annum) outside-the books of account. Thus, by applying the rate of 1.25% per month on the amount of PDCs for the intervening period i.e. from date of sale deed to date of encashment of PDCs, the total amount of unaccounted interest paid by the assessee company to the vendors as per Annexure-PDC-Intt. is worked out to Rs. 33,081,969/-. [The above payment of interest is computed only in respect of period under consideration i.e. if in a case where the sale deed was executed during the year but the date of encashment falls in the next financial year than interest only up to last day of relevant, previous year is computed because it is seen from the seized document that invariably the interest was being paid in advance on monthly basis. For the period falling in next financial year, the amount of interest for that per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounsel of the assessee. 6.7 We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issuein- dispute. In the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the addition of cash payment of interest on PDC, however, he directed to charge interest for six month after the sale deed. This identical issue was before the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Impower Infrastructure Private Limited (supra). The Tribunal upheld the finding of the Learned First Appellate Authority in said case, observing as under: "10. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. On the issue of interest the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee in one of the group cases in case of M/s IAG promoters and developers private limited in ITA No. 1674/del/2013 and 1765/del/2013 for assessment year 2008 - 09 wherein the coordinate bench in order dated 31/10/2014 has held as under:- "5. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and perused relevant materials placed before us. At the outset, the ground raised by the revenue is misconceived because Ld. CIT (A) is not deleted the addition of Rs. 5, 06, 625 but has only directed to recalculate the interest. We hav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng period) i.e. period between the date of sale deed and the date of encashment of PDCs), interest was paid in cash to the vendors of the land by the vendee company on monthly basis @ 1.25% p.m. on the amount of PDCs and this cash payment of interest by the vendee company, was not accounted for by it, in its books of account. The addition on the ground has been made in the several group companies of the BPTP group during the course of earlier assessment proceedings u/s 143(3)/148/153A in consequence to search carried out on 15/11/2007. Thus, the Ground No. 1 of the Revenue's appeal is dismissed." 6.9 Respectfully following the finding of the Tribunal on the issue-in-dispute, we uphold the finding of the Learned CIT(A) on the issue-in-dispute. The ground of the appeal of the Revenue is accordingly dismissed. 7. In ground No. 2, the Revenue has challenged deletion of addition of Rs. 6,80,15,748/- on account of additional payment in violation of the Stamp Duty Act, 1899. 7.1 The Assessing Officer made a disallowance of Rs. 6,88,71,998/- under section 37 of the Act on account of additional payments for purchase of land. The assessee challenged the addition before the Ld. CIT(A) on t....