TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1211
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der passed by the Id. CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad, is erroneous, illegal and unsustainable on facta and in law. 2. The Id. CIT(A) erred in sustaining addition of Rs. 50 lakhs as unexplained in the hands of the Appellant. The Id. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Appellant is a partner of M/s. Srinidhi Real Estate and Constructions and that the plot/land references in the seized material belonged to the partnership firm. 3. The Id. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Appellant was not owing plot/land which are referred to in the seized material, and therefore, the onus was on the revenue to enquire into the ownership of the lands especially when the Appellant has submitted that the lands were owned by the partnership firm-Srinidhi Real Estate and Constructions. 4. The Id. CIT(A) and so also the AO erred in shifting the burden of proving the source on to the Appellant when the documents seized clearly reflect the survey numbers of the land on which plotting was done, and- the managing partner of M/s. Srinidhi Real Estate and Constructions in his deposition at question no.21 did accept the ownership of lands in the said survey numbers. 5. The Id. CIT(A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....50,00,000/- towards amount received from the above two persons to the total income of the assessee and assessed the income under the provisions of Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that, the amount referred to in the impounded material found during the course of survey u/s 133A of the Act, in the case of M/s. Srinidhi Real Estate and Constructions belongs to the above firm towards sale of land and the same has been accounted in the books of firm under the head "advances". The assessee further contended that, the firm has developed a land and made into flats and sold to various persons and the assessee being one of the partners of the firm has received advance from various persons and the same has been recorded in the documents found during the course of survey. Since the amount pertained to the firm, the same cannot be added in the hands of the assessee. During the course of appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) forwarded the written submissions filed by the assessee to the A.O. for remand report. The A.O. vide remand report dated 12.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in the possession of the partnership firm and were recorded by the firm in their books of account in the name of the assessee. The assessee, being partner of the firm, has received the money on behalf of the firm from the prospective buyers of the flats and the same has been accounted in the books of accounts of the firm under the head 'advances'. Since the transactions relate to the partnership firm and not pertain to the assessee, the additions made by the A.O. towards income of the assessee cannot be sustained. Therefore, he submitted that, the additions made by the A.O. should be deleted. 8. Learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue, Ms. G. Saratha, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A), submitted that, the documents found and impounded during the course of survey under Section 133A of the Act, clearly shows that, the assessee has received a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- from one person and further sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- from another person on different dates. Further, the above documents are in the name of the assessee. The other evidence found during the course of survey clearly shows that the firm has recorded receipts of money in the name of the assessee, which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the flats for and on behalf of the firm, and the said transactions have been recorded in the books of accounts of the firm as advances. Therefore, the same cannot be assessed as its income. 10. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the relevant reasons given by the A.O. to make addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- towards the cash receipt of Rs. 50,00,000/- from two persons in light of various arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee. We have also considered the relevant material impounded during the course of survey and upon careful consideration of relevant material, we find that, the assessee has received sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- from U. Kumaraswamy as part payment and further received sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- on 24.01.2015 from Ch. Venu for survey numbers 157, 158 and 160 of Rangampet. Further, the above receipts clearly show it is a payment for sale of land at survey numbers 157, 158 and 160. Admittedly, the lands at survey numbers 157, 158 and 160 were owned by the partnership firm M/s. Srinidhi Real Estate and Constructions, which is evident from the relevant financial statements and copies of sale deeds filed by the assessee. In fact, the A.O. never disputed the fa....