9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 983X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... culated the addition for all flats. Accordingly, in respect of previous Assessment Year 2004-05, it was held by the Tribunal that the addition for On-money, made in the said year was not proper inasmuch as such addition could have been made only in respect of the flat in respect of which the evidence of On-money was found at the time of search. The said decision dated 31.03.2011 of ITAT, Ahmedabad was relied on, on behalf of the assessee. Even as for the year 2004-05 also, the addition on account of Onmoney was held to be on the basis of guess work and extrapolation, again in the next yar 2005-06 being year under consideration the addition of ₹ 1,52,53,128/- was made repeating the same story. When in respect of previous Assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the assessee showed the sale of 39 flats for the total price of ₹ 2,18,11,872/-. Net profit of ₹ 16,79,144/- was shown and deduction under section 80-IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for sake of brevity) was claimed for that amount. A search was carried out under section 132 of the Act on 18.06.2003 in which certain loose papers and documents were found and were seized. The statement of Vimal Chimanbhai Shah, partner of the assessee firm, and that of one Chimanbhai Shah, whose proprietary concern had carried out the construction work, came to be recorded. In the initial statement, undisclosed income was admitted, but that was retracted in statement under section 132(4) of the Act by way of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; Bench in assessee's own case in ITA No.2041/A/2007 for the assessment year 2004- 05, has held that in the absence of any cogent evidence, there was no scope for extrapolation. On this basis, it was held that addition cannot be made in other years. Admittedly, evidence of 'on money' alleged to be received pertains to earlier assessment year and not for the assessment year under appeal. We, therefore, following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2004-05 (supra), uphold the view taken by the ld. CIT(A), who has deleted the addition of ₹ 1,52,53,128/-. Resultantly, this ground of appeal is rejected. 5. It could be seen from the facts that the housing projects were de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
