9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of Shri I.E. Soomar in which on similar set of facts and circumstances, taxes have been paid on such cash investments. Record of the assessee needs to be examined as to whether in its case Percentage Completion Method (PCM) has been applied or assessment has been made on the basis of Project Completion Method. We are, therefore, of the view that it would be appropriate if the issue of the impugned addition is restored back to the file of the Ld. AO to carry out necessary investigation as to the receipt of the alleged cash by the assessee and arrive at the conclusion afresh in the light of the material gathered. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue and direct the Ld. AO to make reassessment afresh keeping in view the above directions. Appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Validity of the reassessment - It is observed that the CIT(A) has held that the reopening of the assessment is valid in the eyes of law for the reasons recorded in this behalf. We agree and reject this ground. Appeal of the assessee is dismissed. - ITA No. 6303/Del/2015 ITA No. 6332/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 20-12-2022 - SHRI NARENDRA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid taxes in the year of payment, which proves the authenticity of the seized document which was ignored by the CIT(A). 7. (a) The order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. (b) The appellant craves to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. 3. The assessee s grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. That the said case in law and in the facts, on both, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in rejecting Grounds of the appellant s appeal before him challenging the validity of the assessment order passed u/s. 147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. That the said case in law and in the facts, on both, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in rejecting Grounds of the appellant s appeal before him and strategically confirmed the assessee has received Rs.2,23,71,700/- unaccounted money against Nehru Vikas Minar Project . However as allowed to assessee for these receipt on percentage Competition method/Project Competition method, as per accounting standard-9 in the year when the assessee will be fulfilled the basic parameter of revenue recognition. Whereas, on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the company for its Nehru Vikas Minar Project and added the same to the income of the assessee in his order dated 18.03.2018 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. 8. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee challenged the validity of notice under section 148 to reopen the assessment which, in para 4.2 of the appellate order the Ld. CIT(A) rejected by holding that the notice was issued under the law and act and no question arises on validity of notice. The assessee also questioned the validity of notice under section 148 on the ground that objection raised by the assessee had not been dealt with. This ground was also rejected by the Ld. CIT(A) observing in para 6 of the appellate order that the Ld. AO has disposed off assessee s objections by a speaking order. Regarding cash receipt of Rs.2,23,71,700 against booking of spaces at Nehru Vikas Minar Projects not reflected in books of account and treating it as unaccounted income of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) in para 8 of the appellate order held as under:- 8. I have considered the appellant s contention, carefully gone through the order of the ACIT, Central Circle-18 and deliberated on the case laws referred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said case whatsoever amount has been received by the appellant doesn t show the nature of income, it is mainly nature of advances and will be taxable when the basic parameter of PCM will be fulfilled. The AO is directed that revenue of the assessee will be recognized as method adopted by the assessee for revenue recognition. In the result the ground of the appeal is allowed. 9. The Revenue as also the assessee are aggrieved. Both have come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. The hearing was last fixed for 25.08.2022 but none attended for the assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR was present. He was heard. The hearing was again fixed for 02.12.2022, but the assessee remained unrepresented. We, therefore, proceeded to decide the appeals, after hearing the Learned DR. 11. The Ld. DR submitted that the Percentage Completion Method (PCM) has wrongly been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) in respect of undisclosed cash receipt which has never been brought into the books. He further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has completely ignored that in similar set of facts on the basis of identical seized documents from the same premises, Shri I.E. Soomar paid taxes on cash invested amounting to Rs. 6.64 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
