TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 721
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 2. As per grounds of appeal, the Revenue has challenged the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the additions of Rs. 2,87,55,600/- on account of unaccounted on-money. 3. Briefly stated, the assessee-firm is engaged in the business of real estate primarily construction of residential flats and sale thereof. During the previous Financial Years 2012-13 & FY 2013-14, relevant to AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15, the assessee-firm developed a housing project under the name of "Aqua Polaris" situated at Nana Chiloda, Ahmedabad. A search under s.132 of the IT Act was carried out at the premises of the assessee-firm on 13/06/2013. Consequent upon search, proceedings under s.153A of the Act were initiated inter alia for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee has retracted income of Rs. 2,35,26,600 is added as undisclosed income of the assessee. Further, the assessee had received on money of Rs. 52.29 lacs, which is again, as per the statement of the three purchasers and the confirmation of the assessee. This is also added to the total income. Hence, total addition of Rs. 2,87,55,600 is made to the total income....." 4. Aggrieved by the additions made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred the appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) found merit in the various plea taken by the assessee before him and deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer in both the assessment years, i.e. 2013-14 & 2014-15. 5. The relevant operative para of the order of the CIT(A) concerning AY ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unt of the statements of the customers, it was contended that the disclosure itself included the element of on-money received from the customers for sale of flats in the project. Therefore, there was no justification to make further addition on the same ground. The assessee relied on number of decision of the jurisdictional High Court wherein it has been held that even after detection of on-money receipt or unaccounted cash receipt, what can be brought to tax is the profit embedded in such receipts and not the entire receipts themselves. In the case of the appellant, admittedly receipt of on-money was detected by the Department which was based on the incriminating material seized and also on the evidence gathered in the course of search in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions made by the Assessing Officer by first appellate authority before Tribunal. 7. When the matter was called for hearing, the Ld.DR for the Revenue relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. In furtherance, the Ld.DR referred to the categorical statement made by the assessee in the course of search and contended that the assessee could not have declared lesser income than what is stated in the statement recorded under s.132(4) of the Act. It was further submitted that the statement was recorded on the basis of incriminating evidences towards unaccounted receipts. It was thus asserted that assessee could not have shifted from its stated position in the facts of case. It was next pointed out that certain parties were also cross-verifi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ofit & Loss account in tune with the deposition made in the statement made on behalf of the assessee at the time of search. The only dispute is whether whole amount of onmoney receipt can be subjected to taxation or only the income embedded therein can be brought to tax in the facts of the case. While assessing the income, as per Assessing Officer, the assessee-firm has wrongly claimed and set off expenses against the aforesaid disclosure made in the statement recorded where it was categorically admitted that disclosure was of net income. As per Assessing Officer, the assessee is not entitled to adjust expenses against the unaccounted receipts. The Assessing Officer had also made separate addition of Rs. 52.29 lakhs based on statement of th....