TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 1285
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....015-16 2. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition made by learned Assessing Officer in the sum of Rs. 1 crore as unexplained investments made by the payment in cash to Sh. Jagat Bhushan Batra in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. A search and seizure operation was carried out under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in the Doon Valley Distillers/Breweries group of cases on 18.03.2016. One Shri Rameshwar Havelia Kuanwala, Dehradun, was belonging to Doon Valley group, was also searched, wherein certain papers ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Miyanwal, Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti by the asessee. 7. With regard to payment of Rs. 1 crore in cash, the assessee did not have sufficient cash with him and accordingly on 05.12.2014, he entered into a partnership deed with Sh. Rameshwar Havelia, pursuant to which, Sh. Rameshwar Havelia made cash payment of Rs. 1 crore to Sh. Jagat Bhushan Batra on behalf of the assessee. Later, the assessee came to know that Sh. Jagat Bhushan Batra has already sold the land to a third party and accordingly canceled the agreement of sale dated 04.12.2014. Pursuant to this cancellation, the assessee confronted Sh. Jagat Bhushan Batra and sought for refund of the cheque money paid in the sum of Rs. 1 crores (Rs. 50 lakhs + Rs. 50 lakhs). By that time, since....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....egorically stated that it is Sh. Rameshwar Havelia, who had made cash payment of Rs. 1 crore to Sh. Jagat Bhushan Batra. Hence, the receipt of money in cash by the assessee from Sh. Rameshwar Havelia is proved beyond doubt by the orders of the Income Tax Department itself. Hence, the source for making payment to Sh. Jagat Bhushan Batra of Rs. 1 crore in cash stands clearly proved and explained. Hence, in our considered opinion, there cannot be any unexplained investment made by the assessee in the sum of Rs. 1 crore in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 8. Since the search assessment order of Sh. Rameshwar Havelia for assessment year 2015-16 could not be placed on record by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) as it was obt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... various expenses incurred in connection with transfer, from sale consideration. The AO did not dispute the sale consideration reported by the assessee. 13. We find that the learned AO denied the deduction on account of registration charges paid in the sum of Rs. 34,730/- to Stamp Authority at the time of purchase of property. This, in our considered opinion, is not correct in view of the fact that the assessee had produced the purchase deed of immovable property before the learned AO and this sum of Rs. 34,730/- is duly reflected thereon as paid by him for the purpose of registering the property in his name. It is not the case of the revenue that the source for making the said payment is not explained by the assessee. Hence, this sum of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e had purchased land consisting of 508.55 sq. meters and had demarcated the land into three plots and finally sold these plots to three different persons as under: Date of Sale Name of Buyer Area Amount 31.12.2015 Smt. Mamta Pathak 111.52 5,78,000/- 15.12.2015 Smt. Vinita Gosain 276.57 14,32,000/- 15.01.2016 Smt. Kalawati Pandey 120.46 10,60,500/- Total 508.55 30,70,500/- 19. For the purpose of aforesaid partition of land into different plots, the assessee has engaged the services of civil contractor, Sh. Sandip Kumar. We find that the assessee has also placed evidence on record in the form of letter of confirmation dated 21.05.2018 from Sh. Sandeep Kumar, civil contractor confirming the fact of ren....