Case Law Details
It has not been disputed that the four sellers of the agricultural lands were neither examined nor their statements recorded, nor sec. 50C was invoked against them. Under these circumstances, the addition on the basis of a presumption which according to I.T. Act can only be raised against seller, cannot be made in the hands of the purchaser. Besides, we find merit in the argument of learned counsel for the assessee that provisions of sec. 142A cannot be applied against a transaction which is stock in trade. Order of CIT(A) is upheld as being on just and proper observation.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI
ITA No. 5597/Del/11 – A.Y. 2008-09
DCIT Vs. M/s Nihalsons Real Estate Developers
ORDER
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
