TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1539
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the assessment order, which is bad in law, void ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. 2. The ld. AO was not justified in providing sufficient opportunity to the appellant to furnish document or reply in support of the claim and confirming the addition. 3. The ld. AO was not justified in making addition of Rs. 56,00,000/- as income from unexplained investment u/s 69 without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. That the ld. AO was not justified in levying interest of Rs. 20,24,568/- u/s 234B of the Income-tax Act." 2. Heard the learned Representatives of both sides at length and case- records perused. 3. Brief....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ession of one Shri Dinesh Goswami ["Shri Goswami"] during search proceeding u/s 132 conducted upon him inventorised as Page No. 38 of LPS-2 and Page No. 58 of LPS-1. The first document (Page No. 38 of LPS-2) has been re- produced by AO on Page No. 4 of assessment-order. The AO observed that this document contained the details of impugned House DV-11 sold by M/s Amrit Homes Pvt. Ltd. to assessee for Rs. 2,53,50,000/- [Rs. 2,55,00,000 (-) discount Rs. 1,50,000]. Further, the document also contains break-up of "cheque-payment" and "cash-component". The second document (Page No. 58 of LPS-1) has been extracted by AO on Page No. 5 of assessment-order which shows "cash as per Binda Sir at 05.11.2013" - Rs. 56,00,000/-". On the basis of these docu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. DR for revenue carried us to Para No. 5.3 of the order of DRP, copy at Page No. 49 of Paper-Book, and submitted that the following observations made by DRP clearly demonstrate that the seized documents can't be said to be dumb: "5.3 We have considered the entire matter carefully. We are compelled to state that the evidence found by way of loose papers are rather clinching. Firstly, there are no abbreviations used. Nor, are the transactions written in any coded language. Secondly, the transactions mentioned for the account part match perfectly with the declared consideration. The assessee is not denying that. Thirdly, the GST or AMC mentioned in these loose papers are also not in dispute. Fourthly, the persons mentioned in the se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cum- acceptance letter". In Clause No. (e) and (g) of this document, the consideration of Rs. 1,97,50,000/- is mentioned and it is also mentioned that the assessee has paid Rs. 70,00,000/- and the balance of Rs. 1,27,50,000/- was agreed to be paid before completion of construction and handing over possession of vila. Therefore, it is very much clear that the registered sale-deed 19.03.2013 was for plot (with under structure-level house) only and the construction was to be done subsequently for which the assessee was required to make independent payments. This also corroborates with the seized document "Page No. 58 of LPS-1" re-produced above which clearly mentions "Percentage completion as on 30.11.2016 - 90%". In fact, this also meets the ....