Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Thereafter, rejecting all the explanations of the appellant, the AO made additions on account of treating this loan as deemed dividend, and made additions accordingly, restricting the actual quantum of addition - and therefore deemed dividend- to the amount of accumulated profits available for disbursement.

During appeal the appellant has stated that the AO completely ignored all the facts of the case. He has stated that in the present case M/s. Forum Venture Pvt. Ltd. entered into agreement with Ms. Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd. on 24.01.2010 for purchasing 40000 sq.ft. in the form of 6 flats at the square footage rate specified in the said agreement in a project 2 acres at Eastern Metropolitan Bye Pass adjacent to Science City. For this purpose the said company has given the said advance to M/s. Forum Projects Put Ltd. Therefore, this was a business deal between M/s. Forum Venture Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd. The appellant has provided a copy of the said agreement dated 24.01.2010 contained in the paper book pages-75 to 79.

The appellant has gone on to state that after a few days M/s. Forum Venture Pvt. Ltd. thought it wise not to invest in M/s. Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd., therefore, the said agreement dated 24.01.2010 was cancelled by an exit agreement dated 29.01.2010. This agreement has also been provided by the appellant and is contained on pages- 71 to 74 in the paper book. The said amount of Rs.44 62,00,000/ was accordingly refunded by M/s. Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd. to M/s. Forum Venture Pvt. Ltd, as a measure of full and final settlement between the two parties.

I find that in this case clearly the entire arrangement was a business and commercial arrangement duly supported not only by agreements but also I.T.(SS)A Nos.108,109&585/Kol/2022 Assessment years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/s Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd.

by the conduct of the parties involved. It has not been doubted by the AO that the said amounts were given in order to procure a set of flats in a luxurious real estate project not the Case of the AO that the said amounts were given gratuitously to the appellant only by the virtue of its being a beneficial shareholder in Forum Venture Pvt. Ltd. When no aspect of the total transaction is doubted or countered by the AO with any reasoning or evidence I cannot see how the transaction itself can be construed to be anything other than the sum total of its individual parts. Respectfully following the propositions and tests laid down in the aforementioned citations I cannot agree with the AO in his action in this regard. The impugned transaction is clearly a commercial transaction in which two parties entered into a sale purchase agreement for the sale purchase of flats. This is a standard agreement between an investor and a developer for the future purchase of property that was to be developed by the developer. The contractual agreement was binding on both parties. The moneys advanced by the purchaser was against a consideration - the right to purchase the flats specified in the agreement.

3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition u/s 24(i) of the I.T. Act 1961.
4. That the Revenue reserves its right to substantiate, modify, delete, supplement and/or alter the grounds at any time of the appeal proceedings."

13. Ground No.1 - The Assessing Officer noted that during the year the assessee had taken loan from M/s Forum Riviera Construction Pvt Ltd. of Rs.149,78,646/-. The Assessing Officer made the addition u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act and treated the said amount as deemed income of the assessee. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to page 63 of paper-book to submit that the assessee during the year was not having only substantial shareholding of the said 'Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd.'. The share holding of the assessee during the year in I.T.(SS)A Nos.108,109&585/Kol/2022 Assessment years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/s Forum Projects Pvt. Ltd.