9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 920X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. The books of accounts has not been rejected nor any incriminating material or evidence of undisclosed income was unearthed either during the course survey or assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer has himself recognized that the declaration made by the assessee was not based on any surrender. The Assessing Officer has not assessed the income at ₹ 6 crores which was the estimated declaration of income during the course survey, but he has completed the assessment at ₹ 5,14,46,510/-. It is trite position of law that statement recorded during the course of survey cannot be the sole basis for making an addition especially when there is nothing incriminating material or any undisclosed income unearthed during the course ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.O made an addition of ₹ 71,91,658/- being the difference between estimated income declared during course of survey and the returned income as the income of the assessee firm. The reasoning of the A.O for making the addition read as follows: 3.2 The submissions of the assessee have been duly considered. Survey operation was conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 1/12/2006 and the assessee declared an income of ₹ 12.25 crores, in the hands of M/s AHS Joint Venture and M/s Amrapali Homes, on 5/12/2006. The assessee had deposited tax after survey operation, during the period Dec 2006 to March 2007, on the declared income, only in the hands of M/s AHS Joint Venture and M/s Amrapali Homes, and not in the hands ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt Venture and M/s Amrapali Homes, is nothing but an after thought and is not accepted. 3.3 As the assessee had declared an income of ₹ 12.25 crores in the hands of M/s AHS Joint Venture and M/s Amrapali Homes in the F.Y 2006-07 in its statement before the then DCIT, Cir. 35(1) on 5/12/2006 and has admitted the difference in returned income and the surrendered income, therefore, the difference of ₹ 71,91,658/- [12,25,00,000 11,53,08,342/- (7,10,53,492/- + 4,42,54,850/-)] in the declared income of ₹ 12,25,00,000/- and returned income of M/s AHS Joint Venture (Rs.7,10,53,492/-) and M/s Amrapali Homes (Rs.4,42,54,850/-) in total amounting to ₹ 11,53,08,342/-, is added to the income of the assessee. 4. The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion in variance between declared income as per the statement given during the survey proceeding u/s 133A and income returned. I have verified and am satisfied that the practice followed in Real Estate. In the middle of year; it is a tedious task to estimate the income or profit in advance. Further, variation up to 6% is acceptable between the estimation and actual income. Addition of income on the basis of statement given during the survey proceeding u/s 133A is not reasonable and fair as statement shall not have evidentiary value and there shall always be difference between the estimation and actuals. Variation in estimation (%): 5.87% is acceptable. It is found that the presentation of the appellant s AR is satisfactory. For the addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g year (on 1.12.2006) in the case of AHS Joint Venture, the sister concerns of the assessee firm. During the course of survey there was no incriminating material nor undisclosed income found in the hands of the assessee or its sister concern. A statement was recorded from the assessee partner, wherein he estimated the income of the group concern at 12.25 crores of rupees as under: AHS Joint Venture Rs.6,25,00,000 Amrapali Homes Rs.6,00,00,000 Rs.12,25,00,000 6.1 However, after finalization and audit of accounts, the income declared by the respective concerns whereas as follows: AHS Joint Ventu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot based on any surrender. The Assessing Officer has not assessed the income at ₹ 6 crores which was the estimated declaration of income during the course survey, but he has completed the assessment at ₹ 5,14,46,510/-. 6.4 It is trite position of law that statement recorded during the course of survey cannot be the sole basis for making an addition especially when there is nothing incriminating material or any undisclosed income unearthed during the course of survey proceedings u/s 133A of the Act. 6.5 In view of the aforesaid reasoning we are of view that the order of the CIT(A) is correct and in accordance with law and no interference is called for. It is order accordingly. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
