Case Law Details
M/s. Asma Estates and Investments Private Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
Conclusion: No addition could be made under section 69B because the two pieces of evidence relied on by Revenue Authorities viz., the data retrieved from the Pen-drive and the admission by the vendors of the property though might have a persuasive value but would not have much substantive evidentiary value in order to make additions in the hands of the assessee.
Held: AO concluded that assessee company had paid on-money to the sellers of the property and added to the income of assessee invoking the provisions of section 69B. It was held that Revenue Authorities had not produced the seller’s assessment orders to verify the facts of those cases and by relying on the oral statements such addition was made in the hands of the sellers which was not appropriate. The final outcome of those assessment Orders was also not brought to notice. When there were no other cogent corroborate evidence, it was not understood as to how such addition could be made in the hands of the buyers as well as the sellers of the property. The two evidence relied by Revenue Authorities viz., the data retrieved from the Pen-drive and the admission by the vendors of the property though might have a persuasive value but would not have much substantive evidentiary value in order to make additions in the hands of assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, AO was directed to delete the addition made for Rs. 14,09,25,000/- in the hands of assessee towards on-money paid for the purchase of the residential property.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD
The instant batch of three appeals pertain to twin assessees namely M/s. Asma Estates and Investments Private Limited and M/s. S.V. Multi Logitech Private Limited. The former assessee herein has filed its appeal ITA No.782/Hyd/2020 against the CIT(A)-11, Hyderabad’s order dt.11-09-2020 in appeal No.10275/2019-20, the latter assessee’s appeals ITA Nos.784 & 785/Hyd/2020 arise against the very CIT(A)’s orders dt.04-09-2020 all in appeal Nos. 10280/2019-20 & 10286/2019-20, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.153C in former and u/s.143(3) r.w.s.153A in latter twin assessee’s; respectively.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
