TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 1756
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urns of income for some of the impugned years admitting incomes which were reiterated in the returns filed in response to notices u/s. 153C of the Act. 3. In the course of assessment proceedings, based on certain entries in the registers impounded/seized, AO has arrived at suppressed gross receipts at Rs. 6,93,31,764/- pertaining to two ventures of assessee. He has quantified the gross sale receipts of both accounted and unaccounted on the basis of evidences available on the registers impounded or on the basis of the sale value noted and thus quantified the total gross receipts at Rs. 21.96 Crores. The accounted turnover from AYs. 2012-13 to 2015-16 (upto the date of search) have considered at Rs. 15.03 Crores and therefore the difference of Rs. 6.93 Crores is considered as suppression of income and distributed to the impugned assessment years as under: A.Y. Suppressed Income (Rs) 2012-13 45,57,000 2013-14 2,97,12,880 2014-15 2,74,59,784 2015-16 76,02,100 Total: 6,93,31,764 4. It was the contention of assessee that the quantification of the income was not correct and the quantification of the turnover based on the registers is also not correct as those registers are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uppressed income of appellant, the appellant's plea is that only profit element on the alleged suppressed turnover can be brought to tax. In support of this contention, the appellants AR has placed reliance on a number of case laws. The said decisions have been perused. None of the decisions relied upon by the appellant's AR are of the jurisdictional High Court. Further, both the decisions of Gujarat High Court which have been relied upon, and all the decisions of Hon'ble Hyderabad ITAT relied upon, are seen to be pertaining to assessees in lines of business, completely different from the line of business of the appellant here. Since the profit-element would vary hugely from one line of business to another, these decisions do not help the case of the appellant in any manner. Only one decision of the MP High Court, viz, CIT vs. Sharda Real Estate (P) Limited (2014) 099 DTR 100 (MP-HC) pertains to an assessee in the business of sale of real estate and flats, wherein the MP High Court, after discussing decisions of various other High Courts, held as under: "11. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Panna Corporation (2012) 74 DTR (Guj) 89, where asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax net. Keeping in view the proposition laid down by the jurisdictional High Court as well as other High Courts as discussed hereinabove and totality of facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly, keeping in view the nature of the assessees business of purchase and sale of real estate and flats, we direct the assessing officer to take 25 per cent of sale proceeds received in cash as assessees income rather than making addition of entire amount of sale proceeds received in cash. We direct accordingly." From the judgement reproduced above, it can be seen that while all Courts-have unanimously held that only profit element out of the suppressed turnover should be taxed, the estimation of that profit element would depend on the facts of the particular case. In the case of the appellant at hand, the AO is of the view that lithe undisclosed receipts are outright income forming part of already sold plots for which assessee has already booked expenses," and therefore, the AO has taxed 100% of the amount as suppressed income. The appellant on the other hand contends that the average Net Profit Rate of 4% returned by it should be applied. The contention of the appellant to app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oultry Farm, in ITA No. 1106(B)/2014, dt. 06- 11-2015; ii. CIT Vs. Sharda Real Estate (P) Ltd., [99 DTR 100] (MP-HC); iii. ITAT Cochin Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s. Archana Trading Co., in ITA Nos. 351 & 352/Coch/2011, 28-02- 2013; iv. ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Sri Katakam Srinivas Vs. ITO, in ITA No. 517/Hyd/2017, dt. 30-11- 2017; v. ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Sri Narendar Reddy Maddi Vs. ITO, in ITA No. 871/Hyd/2016, dt. 25-04- 2018; vi. Order of the Hon'ble High Court of AP in the case of Ravi Foods Pvt. Ltd., in ITTA No. 35 of 2015, dt. 16th June, 2015; 9. Ld.DR however, submitted that there is no evidence of having spent any amount outside the books of account and therefore AO was correct in treating the suppressed receipts as income of assessee. He relied on the orders of AO in support of the Revenue appeals. With reference to quantification of turnover, it was submitted that the turnovers quantified on the basis of the evidence available in the course of search and consequently, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the turnover on which there cannot be any dispute. 10. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders on record. Even ....