Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2022 (8) TMI 516 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        ITAT Mumbai Upholds Estimation of Real Estate Project Profits Based on Search Material The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s decision in estimating profits in real estate projects based on incriminating material found ...
                          Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                              ITAT Mumbai Upholds Estimation of Real Estate Project Profits Based on Search Material

                              The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s decision in estimating profits in real estate projects based on incriminating material found during a search operation. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals by both the assessee and the revenue, following decisions in related cases and sustaining the profit ratios determined by the Ld.CIT(A). Issues related to jurisdictional matters, violation of natural justice, and the application of accounting standards were also addressed and decided in favor of the Ld.CIT(A).




                              Issues:
                              1. Estimation of profit in real estate projects based on incriminating material found during search.
                              2. Application of profit ratio determined in a related case to the present case.
                              3. Jurisdictional issues and violation of principles of natural justice.
                              4. Addition made on account of unaccounted money and application of Accounting Standard-9.

                              Issue 1: Estimation of Profit in Real Estate Projects:
                              The appeals involved the estimation of profit in real estate projects based on incriminating material found during a search operation under the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer estimated the profit in the Shakti Lake City project and applied the same percentage to estimate the profit in the Shree Rudra project. The Ld.CIT(A) considered the submissions, verified the records, and determined the average profit earned by the group in the Shakti Lake City project at 18.8%. The Ld.CIT(A) then applied the same profit ratio to the Shree Rudra project, as all projects run by the group were treated as similar. The Tribunal sustained the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) based on a similar case involving Shakti Lake City project, dismissing the appeals filed by both the assessee and the revenue.

                              Issue 2: Application of Profit Ratio from Related Case:
                              The Ld.CIT(A) followed the findings in a related case involving Shri Parth Vinod Gadhiya to determine the profit ratio for the Shakti Lake City project. The profit ratios determined for the A.Y. 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17 in the related case were 0.72%, 28.8%, and 26.8% respectively. The Ld.CIT(A) adopted an average profit ratio of 18.8% for the Shakti Lake City project based on the related case. The Tribunal upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s decision, as the projects involved in the present case were deemed to be part of the same and similar projects carried out by the assessee.

                              Issue 3: Jurisdictional Issues and Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
                              The assessee raised several grounds before the Ld.CIT(A) related to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer, violation of principles of natural justice, and the addition made on account of unaccounted money. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the grounds raised by the assessee concerning jurisdiction and estimated the income at 18.8% similar to the related case. The Tribunal did not find any reason to disturb the Ld.CIT(A)'s findings on these issues.

                              Issue 4: Addition on Account of Unaccounted Money and Application of Accounting Standard-9:
                              The revenue raised grounds related to the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unaccounted money and the application of Accounting Standard-9. The revenue argued that the Ld.CIT(A) wrongly applied estimated profit based on the related case, overlooking the fact that the receipts and payments were in the form of unrecorded cash transactions. However, the Tribunal upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s decision, as the receipts and payments were considered unrecorded cash transactions, and accounting standards were deemed not applicable in this context.

                              In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s decision in estimating profits in real estate projects based on incriminating material found during a search operation. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by both the assessee and the revenue, following the decisions in related cases and sustaining the profit ratios determined by the Ld.CIT(A). The issues related to jurisdictional matters, violation of natural justice, and the application of accounting standards were also addressed and decided in favor of the Ld.CIT(A).
                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found