TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 327
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... r.w.s.194C of the Act. 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of purchase of bricks of Rs. 36,09,000/- as bogus. 6. Both the lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts and they further erred in grossly ignoring various submissions, explanations and information submitted by the appellant from time to time which ought to have been considered before passing the impugned order. This action of the lower authorities is in clear breach of law and Principles of Natural Justice and therefore deserves to be quashed. 7. The learned C1T(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Id. AO in levying interest u/s.234A/B/C of the Act 8. The learned C1T( A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Id. AO in initialing penalty u/s.271(l)(e) of the Act." 3. The fact in brief is that return of income declaring loss of Rs. 1,74,25,492/- was filed on 30th Sep, 2014. The case was subject to scrutiny assessment and notice u/s. 143(2) of the act was issued on 24th Sep, 2015. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....munda Materials Suppliers 12,99,790 07.02.2014 Chamunda Materials Suppliers 8,09,400 2.02.2014 Janvi Earth Mcvers (Ashokbhal) 1,33,100 TOTAL 79,56,790 Even though repeated request, you are not furnished the ledger copy of above parties, bills and vouchers, their address, credibility of above parties and details of income-tax returns filed if any by them. Therefore, the details of above parties are completely unverifiable. 4. Further, bills, transportation receipt and ledger copy of Dharmik building materials for purchase of bricks of Rs. 36,09,000/- was not famished till date. It is surprise to notice that on single day i.e. 25.05.2013, you have shown purchase of 8,02,000 bricks. 5. On verification of details furnished by you, it is observed that you have done construction work and bill raised from following parties, but not shown as income and kept outstanding in balancesheet as advances- Bills raised A/c. (Arunaben A. Joshi - P.No.5) Rs. 14,35,500 Bills raised A/c. (Kananben D. Bhojak - P.No. 1 1) Rs. 16,55,171 Bills raised A/c. (Nileshbhai M. Rathod - P.No. 14) Rs. 13,96,239 Bills raised A/c. (S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it Report and Annual Return of VAT filed by you for the year under consideration. Also, give reconciliation statement, if there is any mismatch between sales/purchase s as per books of account and VAT audit report/VAT Annual return." You are hereby given last opportunity to clarify your case. You are requested to attend office on or before 19/ 12/2012 with necessary details and explanation on the each point as mentioned above. If you fails to attend the office in stipulated time, it is presumed that you have nothing to say in the matter and your case will be finalized after making disallowance / additions as discussed in. point No. 10 above." However the assessee has not made any compliance before the Assessing Officer. Even the Assessing Officer has given further time vide notices dated 15th December, 2016, 30th December, 2016 and 13th December, 2016 and till the date of assessment order no detail has been furnished. Under the circumstances, the Assessing Officer has made detailed analysis of facts emerged from the material available on record as elaborated at page no. 5 to 10 of the assessment order. The Assessing Officer has also found discrepancy in the detail of cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....parate addition, in view of the addition of Rs. 38,12,423/- made in the net profit of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by restricting the addition to gross profit @ 18% as against estimation of gross profit @ 25% made by the Assessing Officer after taking into account the high turnover shown by the assessee compared to the previous year. 5. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the ld. counsel has contended that ld. CIT(A) has restricted the addition of gross profit at 18% which is at the higher level without any valid reason. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative contended that in spite of giving a number of opportunities, the assessee has failed to substantiate the genuineness of huge losses before the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings, he supported the order of ld. CIT(A). 6. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. During the course of assessment, the Assessing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6/- shown by the assessee. Value of opening stock in Rs. 3,04,12,278/- Less: Opening work in progress in Rs. 2,48,36,785/- Net figure is to be considered as Value of opening stock of land in Rs. 55,75,493/- Add: Land development expenses in Rs. 1,24,59,039/- Total land cost in Rs. 1,80,34,532/- -Total land in Sq.Mt. Rs. 13503.94 Cost of land per Sq.Mt. in 1335.50/- Value of Closing stock worked out for open land (7709.32 Sq.Mt. x Rs. 1335.50) in Rs.- 1,02,95,797/- The assessee has shown cost of sales of Rs. 3,40,78,002/- as against sales shown of Rs. 1,38,36,743/- only. In construction line, it is not believable that the builder sold its stock by receiving sales price less than the cost price and shown trading loss of Rs. 2,02,41,259/~. Copy of registered sale deed not provided even after repeated request. Copy of building plan approved by concerned authority was not provided Details of land development cost along with total area of land developed during the year. Copy of ledgers along with necessary bills and vouchers of different parties for land development expenses is not provided. ....