2023 (10) TMI 83 - AT - Income Tax

On-money receipts - additions were made by AO relying upon the statements of employees and What's App chat - presumption u/s 292C - department had carried out section 133A survey - HELD THAT - We are of the view in this factual backdrop that not only section 2(12) duly includes such seized material in the definition of books or books of account being in digital form but also the same carries presumption of correctness regarding the contents thereof u/s 292C of the Act. We make it clear that the assessee itself is fair enough in not disputing correctness of above stated whatsapp chat throughout. This is indeed coupled with the fact that its authorized person(s) Mr. Mangesh Nipunge as well as Smt. Mohini Shripad had also confirmed the fact that they had been collecting cash payments from purchasers. Faced with the situation, learned counsel quoted a catena of case laws that such search statements recorded u/s 132(4) hardly carry any significance in light of CBDT s landmark circular dated 10.03.2003. We, however, note that the exception herein is the assessee s whatsapp chats seized from its authorized staff accounts which have been nowhere disputed. And also that the said chats as well as learned lower authorities duly corroborates the fact that the corresponding heads therein in lieu of on-money payment is allotment of parking space only. We, thus, invoke the statute presumption u/s 292C in the facts and circumstances to confirm the impugned on-money addition of Rs. 3 lakhs in very terms. This former assessee s appeal fails therefore.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves appeals against orders passed under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) and u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2019-20 by the CIT(A)-12, Pune.

M/s. Mittal Projects - ITA No.518/PUN/2022:
1. The appeal challenges the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged on-money receipts.
2. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the addition of Rs.3,00,000.
3. The appellant argued that the additions were made without sufficient corroborative evidence.
4. It was contended that all flats were sold along with parking spaces as part of registered agreements.
5. The appellant suggested determining net income after deducting proportionate expenses on construction.
6. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was criticized for not giving due importance to the evidence provided by the Assessee.

M/s. Jindal Mittal Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. - ITA No.519/PUN/2022:
1. The appeal contests the addition of Rs.7,53,000 towards alleged on-money receipts.
2. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the addition.
3. Similar arguments were made regarding lack of corroborative evidence and the nature of the transactions.
4. The appellant sought to determine net income after deducting construction expenses.
5. The evidence provided by the Assessee was claimed to be disregarded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).

Judgment Details:
The judgment notes that a survey conducted by the department found cash at the office premises of M/s. Mittal group, leading to a search. The Assessing Officer initiated scrutiny and made on-money additions based on WhatsApp chats and statements of employees. The judgment emphasizes the statutory presumption regarding seized digital material and the correctness of WhatsApp chats. The appeals were dismissed as the evidence supported the additions. In the case of M/s. Jindal Mittal Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd., the appeal was also dismissed as the burden to rebut the statutory presumption was on the assessee, and no supportive evidence was provided. The appeals were dismissed accordingly.

Separate Judgement:
No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.