TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1519
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Income for the assessment year 2011-12 on 29-09-2011 declaring total income of Rs.1,20,57,700/-. The return was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act vide order dated 21-02-2012 and was accepted the returned income. Thereafter, in consequence of search conducted at the premises of HN Safal Group on 04-09-2013, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.153C of the Act on 15-11-2018 on the ground that assessee has purchased a bungalow no.99 of Amrakunj Scheme developed by Safal Estate and made on-money payment of Rs. 20 lakhs and Rs. 67 lakhs for the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 respectively. Pursuant to the search action, the HN Safal group has admitted before the Income Tax Settlement Commission the receipt of on-money as additional income in respect of various schemes floated by them. Accordingly, Hon'ble Settlement Commission has passed the order u/s. 245D(4) of the Act and Safal Group paid the appropriate tax. The excel sheet sized during the course of search clearly depicts bungalow no.99 of Amarkunj scheme and entry of on-money by various purchasers. Therefore, the AO made addition of Rs. 20 lakhs and 67 lakhs as on-money paid by the assessee relevant to the assessment years....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de herein above, addition made by AO for Rs.20,00,000/- being on money payment towards purchase of bunglow from HN Safal Group is confirmed. Thus, the related grounds of appeal are dismissed." 4. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal :- "1. The order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer u/s. 153C of the Act is bad in law and the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the same. It is submitted that it be so held now and the order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer u/s 153C of the Act as upheld by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) be quashed. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made by the Learned Assessing Officer without providing opportunity of cross examination of the person on whose statement department relies and also without providing details of full petition filed before the settlement commission. It is submitted that it be so held now and addition of 20,00,000/- made without providing adequate opportunity to the Appellant and thus denying natural justice be deleted. 3. The Learned Comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....only against the assessee herein namely Dr. Rajesh N. Desai not against Dr. Meena R. Desai. Perusal of the Sale Deed dated 29-05-2013 which is available at Page Nos. 38 to 56 makes it clear the assessee and his wife are the co-owners who purchased the above property. The total sale consideration of Rs. 99 lakhs were paid by both the parties. Thus the Assessing Officer initiated the assessment proceedings only against one co-owner without making verification of the seized material which is not sustainable in law. There is no other evidence or seized material found by the Department for making the addition on account of on-money of Rs. 20 lakhs and Rs. 67 lakhs paid by the assessee for the Asst. Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 respectively. 5.2. On an identical case, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of ITO Vs. Bharat A Mehta reported in [2015] 60 taxmann.com 31 wherein it was held as follows: "Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Unexplained Investment (Investment in property). Assessment year 1992-93-Assessee purchased a bunglow in a housing scheme from a builder firm during search, partners of said firm admitted having received certain amount as on money from b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ground that sellers of said property offered higher amount in respect of said property as undisclosed investment Whether declaration made by sellers in respect of said transactions could not bind assessee - Held yes Whether since in Settlement Commission proceeding full value of 1/3rd share had been accounted for, i.e Rs. 44.84 crores, any addition could not be made to assessee's income in absence of any concrete evidence -Held, yes Paras 12 & 13 in favour of assessee" 5.5. Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Heirs and Legal Representatives of Shri Laxmanbhai S Patel vs. CIT 327 ITR 290 (Guj has observed as follows: "......The legal effect of the statement recorded behind the back of the assessee and without furnishing the copy thereof to the assessee or without giving an opportunity of cross-examination, the addition is made the same is required to be deleted on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. This is clearly stated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellarum (supra) wherein it is stated that before the Income-tax authorities could rely upon it, they were bound to produce it before the assessee so that the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....200,000 19 Rameshbbel Total 105.401,290 : 74 792,500 : 179.654,100 $2,700,600: $2,700,600 71.566,543 73,566.900 1:52.535,000 : 46, DE1,125 : 45,768,200 30,187,215 (2,700,060) 27,486.595 TB Staventhai 3Vicodbhai H. Shah 7,327.000 7.452.000 - 14,779,000 ; 1.963,500 1,563.500 2,732,400 2.732.400 12,751,300 : 5,500,000 5,500.000 295.000 195,900 1,751,300 L- Strvabbal Total 7,327,000 7.457,000 : 14,773,000 3,663,500 2 732,400 2,732.400 12,791,800 5,500,000 5.500,000 215.900 1,791,500 72: 9 Sunibhal kira & Bharat bal R Shali / Gosta Bharat S 15,873.000 7,762.300 : 23,634, 500 1,506,500 2,974,000 2.070,000 20.013,000 : 1.000,000 11,500,000 7,00€,50€ (1,491,500) 5,513,000 ÄJaxa Sund Shah / Munial Sunil Sha all" 6,756,600 6,743,500 13,499.680 11/4,300 1171,300 :2.472,433 2,472.433 11,7001.547 3,750,001 3.758,004 2,100,712 2100,773 4,201,5% 22,529,680 14,505,500 37,135,180 11,314,840 11,314,843 . 4,542 00 4547,433 31, 714,547 : 6,750,001 15,250.000 9,107,212 5,714,54% 75:EUN Sir Panneah Ranjan [2 372,200) 2,372.200 APooja Todi 6,000,000 6,984,000 13,584,000 3,390,000 2,300,000 3,026,400 3,026,000 12.637,900 6,450,000 [121....