9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1933X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the return of income for A.Y. 2014-15 filed by the assessee declaring total income has been accepted by the ACIT-20(1), Mumbai u/s 143(3) of the Act. Therefore, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A). - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 4597/Mum/2015 - - - Dated:- 11-9-2017 - SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) For the Revenue : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai, DR For the Assessee : Shri Rajeev Waglay, AR ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2011-12. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai and arises out of the order u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impounded as per Annexure A-1. The contents of the impounded material have been explained by me. I confirm that the cash receipts amounting to ₹ 8,11,02,500/- is unrecorded in the books of account and the same is offered to tax for current financial year corresponding to AY 2014-15. I also offer the difference in stamp duty valuation and agreement value in respect of flat no. 504 amounting to ₹ 34,07,888/- under income from Other Sources for AY 2014-15. As explained earlier we have not offered any income to tax in respect of this project even though the project is almost complete. In view of this I have estimated net profit in respect of the 28 flats sold till date at 10% of total cheque received of ₹ 16,17,10,000/- i.e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 35,00,000 000068 3. 30.01.2014 ₹ 85,00,000 000069 4. 30.02.2014 ₹ 85,00,000 000070 5. 15.03.2014 ₹ 85,00,000 000071 Total ₹ 3,40,00,000 3.1 However, the Assessing Officer (AO) noted that ISAE had sold flats at and around the market value i.e. ₹ 8,44,46,750/- but recorded in the books of accounts at agreement value of ₹ 5,84,30,000/- only. Thus the balance amount of ₹ 2,50,65,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A). 5. Before us, the Ld. DR submits that the AO has rightly assessed the undisclosed cash receipts of ₹ 2,07,75,000/- in AY 2011-12 since the agreements pertaining to those receipts were registered in FY 2010-11. He made reference to para 4 of the assessment order dated 26.03.2014 passed by the AO. Thus the Ld. DR supports the order passed by the AO. 6. Per contra the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that the said amount was assessable in the AY 2014-15 when the project was completed and the entire amount of receipts was offered to tax. It is stated by him that in the profit and loss account (page 110 of Paper Book) the unaccounted cash has been stated under the head sales accounts and the total of the same is ₹ 8,1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the course of search were reflected in the books of accounts and could be taxed only in the year in which the project was completed? The Hon ble High Court held that: The finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal is that the receipts in question had direct nexus with the project of the assessee and that the said cash receipts have been offered to tax in the AY 2008-09, since the assessee was following the project completion method. Once the cash in question has already been assessed to tax, the question of taxing the same assessment year in question AY 2005-06 does not arise. 7.1 In M/s M/s Guruprerana Enterprises (supra) the following questions of law were raised before the Hon ble Bombay High Court: a) Whether on the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
