9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is dismissed. - ITA No.1046/Hyd/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) - - - Dated:- 20-1-2021 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member And Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member Revenue by Sri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Assessee by Sri K.C. Devdas ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This is Revenue s appeal for the A.Y 2013-14 against the order of the CIT (A)-5, Hyderabad, dated 12.03.2018. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm which is engaged in the business of development of lands and construction of residential flats with the name and style as M/s. Raasi Associates, Hyderabad. It filed its return of income for the A.Y 2013-14 on 29.09.2013 admitting total income of ₹ 2,55,89,610/-. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailed to appreciate the fact that the assessee confirmed the said statement in the statement recorded during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings. 4. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee has retracted from the statement given during the course of survey as well as scrutiny assessment proceedings. 5. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the Managing Partner along with other partners have given affidavit confirming the profit at ₹ 500/- per sq. ft for the year under consideration. 6. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the profit declared during the previous year Le. for the assessment year 2012-13 was ₹ 500j- per sq. ft and the profit declare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act has been considered by the CIT (A) at page 34 of his order and for the sake of ready reference, the same is reproduced here under: It is seen in the assessment order no defects has been brought out nor any incriminating material exists. Therefore, the addition is just been made on the basis of a statement cannot be quantified for ascertaining the true and correct income of the appellant. In the submission made by the appellant, the appellant has stated that the books of accounts were audited and on the basis of the same the return was filed. The appellant has stated as under: i. The books of accounts were audited based on bills and vouchers ii. During the course of survey no incriminating material establishing tax evasion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The only issue which needs attention is that the appellant has admitted a profit of ₹ 500 per sq. ft in the preceding year under consideration on an agreed basis. The agreement made by the appellant in the preceding year was as per the discussion between the AO and the appellant in the preceding year. In view of the same the above addition is not sustainable being devoid of merit, evidence in relation to the present year under consideration. The relief for the year under consideration, does not give any immunity or the change of stand by the appellate authority for A.Y. 2011-12 as in that year the appellant agreed for the addition and thus preventing the assessing officer to make enquiries or investigate as the income declare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
