TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 686
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was filed with a delay of 04 days and after hearing both the parties, we find the reasons stated by the Ld.DR are bonafide, therefore, the delay of 04 days is condoned. 2. According to the AO, the assessee is a company and engaged in the business of Real estate construction. 3. Ground No.1 & 2 raised by the Revenue challenging the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made on account of estimation by holding the books of accounts are correct. 4. Heard both parties and perused the material available on record. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that no expenditure claimed in respect of construction activities regarding an amount of Rs. 1,40,90,883.66 which has been shown as under the head "substructur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly explained in paragraph 4.8 of the statement of facts duly supported by copy of Conveyance Deed, Architect Certificate, Municipal Completion Plan, Statutory Auditor's Certificate dated 2nd March, 2009 and Architect Clarification Certificate. The appellant company had apportioned the cost of sales at 45.19% of the construction cost as per Profit & Loss Account which is Rs. 7,22,82,601.82. On the other hand, if the cost of sales would have been apportioned at 45.3% (as noted by the Assessing officer in the assessment order) the total cost would have been Rs. 7,24,56,912.99. On these count I agree with the submissions of the appellant and consider the cost of sales to be apportioned @ 45.19% which has been taken in the Profit & Loss Acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ute to under determination of profit of the appellant. And these reasons do not justify rejection of books of accounts & estimation of Profit in view of the appellants response at paragraph 4.10 of its submissions and statement of acts. d) Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed in cn v. Realest Buildings and Services Ltd.307 HR 202 (SC) at para-7 (Pg.204): "If the assessing officer comes to the conclusion that there is under estimation of profits, he must give facts and figures in that regard and demonstrate to the court that the impugned method of accounting adopted by the assessee results in underestimation of profits and is therefore rejected. Otherwise, the presumption would be that the entire exercise is revenue neutr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Realest Buildings & Services Ltd. (supra), we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and it is justified. Then, Ground No.1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 7. Ground No.3 raised by the Revenue challenging the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 8. Heard both parties and perused the material available on record. The AO held that the assessee failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in respect of four parties:- (i) Manak Chand Baid, HUF; (ii) Pashupati Merchandise Pvt.Ltd.; (iii) JSB Business Pvt.Ltd. And (iv) Hamsafar Vyapaar Pvt.Ltd.. The CIT(A) examined the record tog....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the AO in the remand report. Therefore, the claim of the appellant assessee company about the capacity of the share applicants to deposit share application money with the appellant are found acceptable. 5.3. The annexures to Statement of Facts being Annexures - "M", "N", "O", "P" & "Q" from pages 198 to 256 provide the evidences of the identity of the shareholders and their creditworthiness. On perusal of these documents the genuineness of transactions are also found established. Under these facts and circumstances since all the three factors requiring for share capital creditors have been established by the appellant, the addition of share capital amounting to Rs. 32,00,000/- stands explained. Now, there is no need to discuss t....