TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 339
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re the Tribunal. 4. We have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of Mango, Cashew Grafts and Land commission. The AO received some information somewhere in the year 2010 divulging that the assessee had purchased a property worth Rs.72.00 lakh. Re-assessment proceedings were initiated by means of notice u/s.148 issued on 11-05-2010 (hereinafter called 'the first round of re-assessment proceedings'). In the return filed, the assessee had shown unsecured loan at Rs.78,85,000/-. The assessee appeared before the AO. Replying to question No.4 in his statement recorded u/s.131 of the Act, the assessee submitted that: "During the financial year 2008-09, I have made investment of Rs.72.00 lakh in purchase of agricultural land at Morve and Hindale Village of Deogad Taluq admeasuring 0.30 hector and 1.73 Hector respectively...". During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee admitted that he received certain advance from Dr. A.G. Vakundre of Vengurla as the latter was helping him in his land dealing activities. The AO issued a letter to Dr. A.G. Vakundre, who appeared in person. The AO record....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., and Dr. A.G. Vakundre gave his statement on oath that the aforesaid property belonged to him and he had invested the amount on behalf of Sansudha Corporation Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, and had declared the property in his return of income. 2. In the case of another assessee viz. Shri Kamalakant Vasant Kubal, it was seen that immovable property was purchased and registered in the name of Shri Kamalakant Vasant Kubal, and the source of income not explained and the same needs to be taxed u/s.68 of the IT Act, 1961, even though the assessee had admitted that the source of the investment is not his. The ACIT, Circle-2, Kolhapur has initiated proceedings u/s.147 of the IT Act, 1961 in the case of his assessee, i.e. Dr.A.G. Vakundre to verify the amounts advanced to Shri Kamalakant Vasant Kubal for purchase of land. 3. Similar facts as mentioned above in the case of Shri Kamalakant Vasant Kubal are applicable in the instant case of Shri Sudesh Sudhakar Angchekar, who is also associated with Dr.A.G. Vakundre and have executed similar land transaction amounting to Rs.72,00,000/- at Hindale, Tal. Devgad. 2. The ACIT, Circle-2, Kolhapur vide letter No.710 dated 24-03- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent proceedings were taken up in the case of Dr. A.G. Vakundre on the same date on which the instant re-assessment proceedings were taken up against the assessee. These proceedings were started to verify the genuineness of loan given by Dr. A.G. Vakundre to the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has reproduced the remand report from the AO of Dr. A.G. Vakundre, in which the status of assessment in the case of Dr. A.G. Vakundre for the assessment year under consideration, has been given as under : "The Assessment for the AY 2009-10 in the case of Dr. Anil Vakundre was re-opened by the O/o. the ACIT, Circle-2, Kolhapur by issue of notice u/s.148 on 24-03-2014. Subsequently the case was assigned to this ward for completion of assessment proceeding vide the Jt.CIT,R-2, Kolhapur order No.Kop/JCIT/R-2/120/2014-15/452 dated 01-08-2014. The scrutiny assessment for the year 2009-10 was completed on 30-03-2015 raising a demand of Rs. 35,877/-. During the assessment proceeding the assessee furnished Confirmation with regard to the advances received from M/s. Sansudha Consultants Pvt. Ltd., & other Companies for purchase of land for these Companies; necessary documentary evidence such as MOU wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndre directly to the seller on behalf of the assessee. That appears to be the sole reason because the registered sale deed was executed in favour of the assessee. In his turn, the assessee reflected the land as his assets in the balance sheet and equal amount as payable to Dr. A.G. Vakundre. Dr. A.G. Vakundre, himself in his statement recorded by the AO, categorically admitted that he paid the consideration of Rs.72,00,000/- for the purchase of property. It is the same property which is the subject matter of dispute. Once Dr. A.G. Vakundre admitted to have paid for the property, which was registered in the name of the assessee, the natural consequence is that the amount paid by Dr. Vakundre is the liability which the assessee owes to him. The transactions of acquisition of the land and its payment by Dr. Vakundre are tagged with each other. If the land is the asset of the assessee, then naturally, the corresponding payment is his liability, irrespective of denial by Dr. Vakundre for extraneous considerations. Viewed from any angle, it is patent that the initiation of re-assessment proceedings on this score cannot be validated. We, therefore, overturn the impugned order by quashing ....