PREM CHAND SHARMA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant appeal, the appellant assessee has impugned the orders passed by the AO, the CIT(A), as also the Tribunal, referred to hereinabove.

(2.) The issue under consideration relates to the addition of Rs. 7,00,000 to the income of the appellant assessee. The his agricultural land, wherein the total consideration payable to the appellant assessee was Rs. 31,60,000 in lieu of the sale of land measuring 23 Kanals 13 Marlas to one Basau Ram. During the course of the execution of the agreement, referred to above, a sum of Rs. 7,00,000 was paid by the aforesaid Basau Ram to the appellant assessee as earnest money. The case of the appellant assessee before the Revenue authorities was that, the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2003 (Annex. A4). It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the appellant assessee, that the amount of Rs. 7,00,000, which stood forfeited to the appellant assessee on account of non -compliance of the conditions stipulated assessee. While determining the issue under reference, the Tribunal has arrived at the conclusion, that theory of forfeiture suggested by the appellant assessee has been concocted by him so as to save his tax liability. The reasons A4) was only a sham transaction so as to save tax, emerged from the factual position taken into consideration by all the authorities. The same stand crystallized in the order passed by the AO in the following format :

(3.) Collectively, on the basis of the factual position noticed hereinabove, the AO, the CIT(A), as well as, the Tribunal bogus document.