Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. These are draft unsigned agreement for purchase of land at village Inayatpura by the assessee Signature Colonisers and Simara Reality.

2. LPS 72 Page 43-46: This is an unsigned draft of an agreement between Simran Reality & the assessee Signature Colonisers in which date of agreement is mentioned as 11.12.2013. Prior to the making of the draft (dated 11.12.2013), the assessee had given an payment of Rs. 60 lacs on 30.11.2013 & 02.12.2013. However while finalising the terms and conditions of the transaction no reconciliation could be made between the assessee and the seller regarding the rate, time ,mode of payment and other terms & conditions and hence the parties agreed to cancel the proposed deal.

3. Accordingly the advance payment made of Rs. 60 lacs was received back by the assessee during July-Oct 2014 the details of which are annexed herewith.

4. LPS 72 Page 48-52: is a second set of draft agreement which is not only unsigned but it also does not contain the name of the assessee or any of its related concerns in any capacity. It may also be mentioned that the assessee has never purchased the land mentioned in the said loose papers.

8. We find that before us, the ld. CIT-DR except relying upon the order of the Assessing Officer could not bring any positive material to controvert the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Having gone through the material available on record and rival submissions, we find that the assessee is a partnership firm and filing the returns regularly. The books of accounts are audited and the TAR is filed. During the course of search action at the premises of Signature Group, some unsigned draft MOU/Agreements Signature Coloniser/Builder 13 ITA 218 and 219 of 2020 between Simara Reality and the assessee were found which were named as LPS 72 page 43-68. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had submitted that these were draft agreements which were not executed due to non agreement between the parties on rates, time of payment etc. It was also submitted that any draft agreement prepared mentions the proposed advance payment and any mention of such advance payment does not signify that payment was made and/or the agreement was executed. We find that the Ld. AO had referred various loose papers based on which the addition under consideration has been made. However, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that all the papers were unsigned and ld. CIT(A) held allowed the assessee's appeals holding that the unsigned agreements never materialised and therefore, the terms and conditions therein cannot be used against the assessee sin absence any independent cogent evidence. We find that neither any of the persons has ever stated that such transaction actually took place. The entire addition has been made on sheer presumption and assumption. The A.O. failed to establish whether the transaction has actually materialised. M/s Simran Reality has stated that the MOU's are draft and did not Signature Coloniser/Builder 14 ITA 218 and 219 of 2020 materialise. The A.O. has failed to bring on record any cogent evidence or direct access of payment by the assessee. Thus, we are of the view that the "dumb document" cannot be used as an evidence to draw an adverse inference against the assessee. Our view is supported by the following judicial pronouncements: