TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 973
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Revenue has proposed the following questions of law for the consideration of this Court; "(i) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 6,02,77,106/- on account of 'business income receipt of On Money received out of books of account made on the basis of the extrapolation of the clinching evidences seized/impounded which has the part of cash and cheque payments receipts in respect of Anupam Square project of the Assessee Group from the premise of Shri Jayantilal Mulchand Patel who admitted in his statement on oath u/s.132(4) of the Act to be a broker for the sales of shops/showroom of the projects? (ii) That on the facts and in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x Appeal No.323 of 2000 reads thus; "1. These appeals arise out of common factual and legal background. They have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgement. For the purpose of this judgement, we may refer the facts as emerging in Tax Appeal No.323 of 2000. This appeal is filed by the revenue calling in question the judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal" for short) dated 1.9.1999. 2. The respondent - assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of construction of flats and residential complexes. The assessee started construction of a total of 120 flats in a complex called "Ashoplab Apartments" in the city of Surat. The scheme contained three types of flats admea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ale of the flats. With respect to the tax liability of the assessee on account of such on money receipts, the Tribunal, relying on its earlier decision in the cash of Kishor Mohanlal Telwala, held that not the entire receipt, but only the profit embedded in such receipt which can be taxed. The Tribunal in view of the fact that the assessee had already disclosed income of Rs. 26 lakhs, believed that no further tax can be imposed. It is this judgement of the Tribunal which the revenue has challenged in the present appeal. 4. At the time of admission of the appeal, the following question was framed: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in deleting the addition made on account of undisclosed income earned by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erused the orders under consideration, what emerges is that the findings arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the respondent - partnership firm received on money of Rs. 62 lakhs during the block period for sale of the flats, is not seriously in dispute. The Tribunal confirmed such findings arrived at by the Assessing Officer. However, the Tribunal did not permit the revenue to collect the tax on the entire receipt believing the it was only the income embedded in such receipt which can be subjected to tax. 10. As pointed out by the counsel for the respondent, this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. President Industries, reported in (2002) 258 ITR 654 had taken a similar view. In the said case, during the course o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Guj.), once again a somewhat similar issue came up before this Court. In the said case, the assessee was engaged in the business of trading of tyres. Search proceedings were carried out at the residential and business premises of the assessee. On the basis of loose sheets which were seized during such search operation, the Assessing Officer held that sales to the extent of Rs. 10.85 lakhs was not found in the books of account. Such amount was included in the total income of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) gave substantial relief to the assessee and reduced the income on the basis of gross profit rate. The Tribunal confirmed the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). On further appeal before the High Court by the revenue, the High Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uestion of law was involved. Significantly, in case or Kishor Mohanlal Telwala, the assessee was engaged in the business of construction. In his case, unaccounted receipt of Rs. 1.47 crores was detected. In this background, the Division Bench confirmed the view of the Tribunal and did not accept the contention of the revenue that as no accounts had been maintained to substantiate the expenditure incurred by the assessee, the entire amount received by the respondent should be treated as income. The Court concluded that the Tribunal was justified in considering that the respondent- assessee ought to have spent reasonable amount for the purpose of receiving such gross receipt. 15. It can, thus, be seen that consistently, this....