TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 305
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... grounds have been raised by the assessee: "1. On the peculiar facts of the case and in law, the proceedings u/s 153C ought not to have been initiated. 2. On the peculiar facts of the case and in law, the proceedings initiated u/s 153C and/or the proceedings conduced in pursuance to the notice dt. 14.01.2022 issued u/s 153C, are liable to be quashed because- a) without providing copy of the 'Satisfaction recorded by the AO of the searched person' to the assessee (even after specific request made by the assessee vide its letter dt 20.12.2022), the learned AO had issued a communication on 23.12.2022 disposing off the basic/ primary objections raised by the assessee; b) it was neither the case of the learned AO that any money, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... names of both the sellers, in equal ratio). 4. On the peculiar facts of the case and in law, the addition of Rs. 2500000/- u/s 56 of the I.T. Act 1961 made by the learned AO and sustained by the learned CIT(A), deserves not to be upheld because the assessee had simply acted as facilitator between Sh. Narender Kapoor and Sh. Aseem Doomra (on one part) and Kritunairu Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. (on the other part). 5. On the peculiar facts of the case and in law, the addition of Rs. 2500000/- u/s 56 of the I.T. Act 1961 made by the learned AO and sustained by the learned CIT(A), deserves not to be upheld because the assessee had not received the money from Kritunairu Builders & Developers Pvt Ltd., for self but had acknowledged the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. Aseem Doomra who is in India had proposed to sell the said property to one M/s Kritunairu Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. 4. Since, one of the owners is a non-resident, Sh. Ashish Gupta, Director of the assessee company was roped in to take forward the deal of sale to M/s Kritunairu Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Accordingly, the assessee entered into agreement to sell & purchase on behalf of Sh. Narender Kapoor and Sh. Aseem Doomra. With a view to conclude the deal, Mr. Narender Kapoor (one of the joint owners) had executed a Power of Attorney at Auckland Country New Zealand in favour of Mr. Aseem Doomra (other joint owner), giving him power to execute the Sale Deed in respect of the said property, in his absence, in favour of the ult....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 56 of the Act. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 8. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. 9. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. * In para 8 at page 6 of the appeal order, the ld. CIT(A) had mentioned "from the agreement to sell and purchase dated 04.02.2019, it is evident that the appellant company though its director Shri Ashish Gupta was acting on behalf of Shri Narender Kapoor and Shri Aseem Doomra...." * It reveals the real sellers (First Party) were Mr. Narender Kapoor & Mr. Aseem Doomra. * In para 16 at page 19 of the appeal order, the ld. CIT(A) had mentioned "in para 15, the ....