(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Revenue has filed this appeal challenging judgement of the Tribunal dated 1.4.2010 raising following question for our consideration :
(A) Whether on the facts of the case and in law and in the circumstances, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in allowing the appeal of the assessee on the issue of unexplained investment of Rs.66,310/- by holding that the addition cannot be covered u/s.153A of the Act as the details were available in original return filed?
(B) Whether on the facts of the case and in law and in the circumstances, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in allowing the appeal of the assessee by holding that the addition of Rs.6,63,100/- being unexplained investment added u/s.69B of the Act on account of enhanced valuation of the property purchased by the assessee for the stamp duty purposes cannot be considered u/s.50C of the Act?
Issue pertains to addition of Rs.6.63 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69B of the Act pertaining to the purchase of the property by the assessee. The Assessing Officer had taken recourse to Section 50C of the Act and made the additions.
Counsel for the respondent pointed out that under similar circumstances, this Court in Tax Appeal No.2296/2009 in case of Commissioner of Income tax v. Vishal Sushilkumar Poddar vide order dated 22.6.2011 found that Revenue cannot have recourse to Section 50C of the Act in case of purchaser's property.
Question being similar, this Tax Appeal is also not entertained.
(Akil Kureshi,J.) (Ms.
Sonia Gokani,J.) (raghu) Top