AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 229
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....perty. 5. Brief facts of the case as noted by the Assessing Officer is that the assessee had not filed any return of income for the assessment year 2010-11. However, AO on perusal of information on NMS module (non filer management system), he noted that the assessee had sold his residential property at Samundra Setu for Rs.2.35 crores on 31/07/2009 in A.Y. 2010-11. Therefore, he reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act'). According to him, eventhough he had issued statutory notices, it were not responded to by the assessee and, therefore, he had no other alternative, but to add the entire sale consideration of Rs.2.35 crores as the income of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who gave partial relief to the assessee by confirming only Rs.37,43,100/- out of Rs.2.35 crores, by holding as under:- "5.3 The second ground of appeal is that the appellant was eligible for deduction towards cost of acquisition of property in computation of long term capital gains and that -the appellant had purchased a new residential house property after selling of house property and was eligible for exemption....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are the purchasers of Flat No. 501, 5th Floor, Samudra Setu, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Mumbai -26 admeasuring about 1020 sq. ft. (carpet) for a lumpsum consideration of Rs. 1,60,00,000/-. c. Sale deed dt. 25.11.2009 wherein Mr. Nikhilesh Chib, is the vendor and Mr. Akhtar Zain Rangoonwala and Mrs. Shehla Akhtar Rangoonwala, are the purchasers of Flat No. 22, 2nd Floor, Ocean View in Ocean View Co-operative Housing Society admeasuring 888 sq. feet carpet area along with one stilt car parking space admeasuring 115.5 sq. feet for a consideration of Rs. 2,60,00,000/- 5.3.4 The appellant has through the above additional evidence filed u/R 46 A attempted to demonstrate that the property in Samudra Setu was sold for Rs 2,35,00,000/- in FY 2009-10, the cost of acquisition of which was Rs. 1,60,00,000/- in FY 2005-06 and the sale proceeds of Samudra Setu were invested in purchase of residential flat in Ocean View for Rs.2,60,00,000/- in FY 2009-10. The appellant has calculated the long term capital gains as sale consideration of Rs.2,35,00,000 less indexed cost of acquisition of Rs 1,60,00,000/- being Rs 2,03,46,076 and indexed cost of stamp duty of Rs 8,14,230/- being Rs 10,35,399/. Howe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s could not be served upon the assessee and, therefore, the Assessing Officer passed the exparte order by framing the best judgement assessment under section 144 of the Act by adding the entire sale consideration to the tune of Rs. 2.35 crores as income of the assessee. Further, according to the Ld.AR, the assessee, before the Ld.CIT(A) filed all the relevant evidences under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (herein after the Rules) to substantiate the fact of purchase of the property [Samundra Setu Co-operative Housing Society] in A.Y. 2006-07, which was sold in the relevant assessment year; and the fact of purchase of new residential property at Ocean View, Colaba, Mumbai and the claim of exemption under section 54 of the Act. According to Ld.AR, the Ld.CIT(A) appreciated the fact of purchases & sale of the residential property at Samudra Setu and also was satisfied with the purchase of new residential property in Ocean View and thereafter was pleased to give partial relief to the assessee and confirmed only Rs.37,43,100/-. According to the Ld.AR, this partial confirmation was also not warranted because the Ld.CIT(A) did not call for the explanation of the assessee regarding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5 crores. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed all the relevant evidences in respect of the transactions under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Ld.CIT(A), after considering the evidences in respect of purchase & sale of the house at Samundra Setu Co-operative Housing Society and thereafter taking note that the assessee had purchased a new house at Ocean View Co-operative Housing Society, found the claim of the assessee in respect of exemption under section 54 of the Act as valid. However, the Ld. CIT(A) found that the assessee failed to explain the source of investment to the tune of Rs.37,43,100/- in the purchase of the new property and therefore, she confirmed Rs.37,43,100/- by noting the difference as under:- Sale proceeds of Flat at Smudra Setu Rs.2,35,00,00/- Less : Amount used to repay loan against Securities (LAS) Rs. 12,43,100/- Balance consideration available for investment in new flat Rs.2,22,56,900/- Consideration paid for new flat Rs.2,60,00,000/- Hence unexplained investment u/s 69C of the Act 37,43,100/- 10. Before us, the Ld.AR has submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has not given any opportunity to the assessee to explain the source of Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nfirmed the addition regarding the claim of the assessee to have received gift of Rs.26 lakhs from her uncle and brother in law. Aggrieved, the assessee is appeal before us. 12. In respect of the impugned action of Ld.CIT(A) confirming addition of Rs.26 lakhs disbelieving the gift received by the assessee/Smt. Shehla Akhtar, it was brought to our notice that the assessee/Smt. Shehla Akhtar received as gift from her paternal uncle Rs.20 lakhs which is evidenced from the bank statement filed by the assessee which is placed at page 16 of the paper book wherein an amount of Rs.20 lakhs has been paid by Shri Sayed Yawar Abbas (paternal uncle /brother of the father of the Smt. Shehla), Rs. 6 lakhs (GBP 6,050) from Mr. Sayed Mujahid Ali Zaidi (brother in law of Smt. Shehla). In order to confirm the fact of the gift of Rs.20 lakhs, the Ld.AR drew our attention to page 6 of the paper book which is a letter written by the donor stating that out of love and affection, an amount of Rs.20 lakhs was given as gift to Smt Shelhla vide cheque No.00179 dated 14/07/2009. The Ld.AR drew our attention to page 7 which is the copy of the HDFC cheque dated 14/12/2009 of Rs.20 lakhs [ HDFC Saving Bank NR(....