TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 18
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs except difference in amounts. 2. Brief facts of the case are that for the A.Y.2015-16, the assessee filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 10,08,910/- on 28.09.2015. The assessee is engaged in construction of apartments and Shri Paruchuru Satish Kumar is main person of the group 'Premier' and also partner in the firm. A search u/s 132 was conducted on 29.11.2017 in "Premier" group and the assessee's case is covered u/s 133A of the Act. The assessee is also one of the group concerns of Premier group. During the course of survey, incriminating material in the form of a small note book was found and impounded as Annexure A/KC/Guntur/6, which contained the details of actual sale consideration received on sale of flat and sale consideration admitted in the books of accounts and offered for registration. The Assessing Officer (AO) in respect of one of the flats found that against the total sale consideration of Rs. 33,30,000/-, the assessee had received the sum of Rs. 22.20 lakhs through banking channels and was offered for taxation / registration and a sum of Rs. 11.10 lakhs was received in cash which remained unaccounted. A statement was recorded during th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and additional receipts were related to additional works and works carried out by the outside persons. The Ld.AR further stated that while quantifying the income, unaccounted expenditure and the additional works undertaken by the outside persons to whom the payments were made out of unaccounted receipts was not considered by the assessee due to oversight. The assessee further stated that in this line of business, generally there are two agreements, first agreement was for sale semi finished flat and the second agreement is for completion of the remaining construction or additional works. The buyers will do the additional works on their own or by engaging outside persons or entrust to the assessee. The total sale consideration consists of cost of semi finished flat and cost of additional works. In the assessee's case, loose papers found during the course of survey establish the said practice. During the course of survey, statements was recorded estimating the difference @Rs. 1000/- per sq.ft for residential flat and Rs. 1500/- per sq. ft in respect of commercial building for working additional receipts, without any basis and the assessee has signed the statements without unders....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5,93,72,000 8,00,00,000 Since the assessee had accepted the additional income during the course of survey and subsequently ratified the statement recorded during the course of survey in the statement u/s 131 by another partner Sri Mittapalli Rajendra Babu, the Ld.DR argued that the AO rightly taxed the undisclosed receipts as income. The Ld.DR further submitted that the undisclosed income assessed by the AO is supported by the evidences found during the course of survey and also fortified by the statement recorded from the partners, therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee and accepting the profit of 30% offered by the assessee, hence, requested to set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and uphold the order of the AO. 5. On the other hand, the Ld.AR vehemently supported the order of the Ld.CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In the instant case, survey u/s 133A was conducted and during the course of survey, loose sheets were found disclosing the unaccounted receipts which were received in cash as well as cheque. Cash the receipts worked out to Rs. 7,93,95,000/- as discussed in the assessment ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inmnarayana (Flat No, 112), Mr. Thiruveedula Leela Purushotham (Flat No.113), M/s.ASK & Parthy (Flat No.121A), Mrs.Kolluru Satyadevt (Flat Nc). 12113) the cash component indicated is 80% to 90% of the consideration which cannot be true in view of the Registered Value to be paid in cheque finally. Further, the material impounded (Annexure A/KC/GUNTUR/ 1) itself contain certain details of cash expenditure in form of payment for electrician Mr. Narasimha Rao to the true of Rs. 4,14,350/- up to 30/09/2013 which shows that such expenditure i s incurred by the appellant. The Annexure A/KC/GUNTUR/7 also contain details of certain cash expenses though no such claim was made during the statement recorded of the appellant , the claim cannot be negated keeping in view the nature of business of the appel lant and also the detai ls contained in the not ings as ment ioned above. In view of the above, there is some justification in the claim of the appellant that the entire additional receipts cannot constitute income of the appellant. The decision relied on by the appellant also lay down the above proposition subject to facts of the case. On the basis of factual position as above and the legal p....