TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1068
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l these appeals are common and inter-linked and as also, are arising out of the similar facts, for the sake of convenience and brevity, all these appeals were heard together on the request of both the parties and are being disposed off by this common order. 2.1 Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue for AY 2011-12 in IT(SS)A No.64/Ind/2021: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,85,38,400/- made by the Assessing officer on account of undisclosed cash credit. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- made by the Assessing officer on account of additional surrendered income not shown by the assessee in ITR." 2.2 Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue for AY 2012-13 in IT(SS)A No.65/Ind/2021: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- made by the Assessing officer on account of surrendered income which was not shown by the assessee in ITR. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ary." 2.5 Grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee for AY 2012-13 in IT(SS)A No.329/Ind/2020: "1a). That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in making an enhancement of Rs. 25,88,306/- in the appellant's income by invoking the provisions of section 251(2) of the Act on account of estimation of net profit at 15% by estimating the turnover of the appellant at Rs. 6,00,00,000/- as against the same shown by the appellant at Rs. 4,66,88,800/- in his audited financial statements for the relevant assessment year. 1b). That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in making the impugned enhancement in the appellant's income without first rejecting the books of account under the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 145 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 1c). That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in making the impugned enhancement of Rs. 25,88,306/- in the appellant's income by estimating the net profit of the appellant at 15% and estimating the turnover at Rs. 6,00,00,000/- merely on guess work, surmises and conjectures, without giving any specific finding as regard to any defect or discrepancy in the regular books of ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of any sales effected by the appellant was found. 2d). That, without prejudice to the above, the estimation of net profit at the flat rate of 15% by the learned CIT(A) is quite excessive and arbitrary considering the nature of trade and net profit already shown and accepted by the Revenue in the appellant's own case for earlier assessment years. 3. That, the appellant further craves leave to add, alter or amend the foregoing ground of appeal as and when considered necessary." 3. The brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee, an individual carrying on the business of real estate developers, under a sole proprietorship, in the name and style of 'M/s. Royal Colonizers, Builders and Developers'. A Survey u/s.133A of the Act was carried out at the premises of the assessee on 21-09-2012. During the course of the Survey proceedings, the assessee admitted certain additional income for all the assessment years under consideration. The assessee furnished his returns of income u/s. 139(1)/139(4) of the Act for the assessment years under consideration. The assessee also claimed to have furnished copies of his audited financial....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder consideration. 6. Against the legal ground dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) and as also against the action of the ld. CIT(A) for enhancement of income, the assessee has preferred cross appeals before us. 7. Ground No. 1 of the Revenue's Appeal for A.Y. 2011-12 7.1 Through this ground of appeal, the revenue has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 2,85,38,400/- made by the Ld.AO on account of unexplained cash deposits made in his various bank accounts during the previous year relevant to A.Y. 2011-12. 7.2 Briefly stated facts are that during the course of the assessment proceedings, Ld. AO, from the Individual Transaction Statement (ITS) generated from the System of the Department, noted that during the relevant previous year, the assessee had made total deposits of Rs. 2,85,38,400/- in cash in his various bank accounts whereas he had not shown any sales or advance received in his return of income and therefore, the entire deposit amount of Rs. 2,85,38,400/- was added to the total income of the assessee u/s. 68 of the Act. 7.3 Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal for the assessment year under consideration before the ld. CIT(A) making....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns of s.68 of the Act. 2.01 That, the relevant provisions of s.68 of the Act are being extracted for a ready reference as under : "Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year:" 2.02 That, on a plain reading of the provisions of s.68 of the Act, it would be observed by Your Honour that the section comes into motion only in a case where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year. 2.03 Thus, perusal of the books of account maintained by the assessee is an essential condition for the purpose of invoking the provisions of s.68 of the Act. In other words, a finding to the effect that any sum is credited in the books of account is sine-qua-non for triggering the provisions of s.68 of the Act. 2.04 In the instant case, it is an established fact that the learned AO has not perused the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia, Mhow Saving 881610110002276 4 Axis Bank, Gawli Palasia Branch, Mhow Saving 650010100003124 5 Bank of Baroda, Mhow Saving 9180100001270 6 ICICI Bank, Mhow Saving 103601500227 7 Axis Bank, Gawli Palasia Branch, Mhow Current 650010200000329 8 HDFC Bank, Pithampur Saving 12911530004964 9 ICICI Bank, Mhow Current 103605000085 10 State Bank of India, Town Hall Branch, Mhow Saving 53016697919 11 State Bank of India, Plawdon Road Mhow Saving 10699666606 12 Union Bank of India, Mhow Saving 362702010086360 5.01 Your Honours, the assessee has carried out an exhaustive exercise of reconciliation of the cash deposits made by him in the aforesaid bank accounts. It is submitted that the cash deposits of Rs. 2,72,14,700/- have, partly, been made by the assessee in the subject bank account out of the cash withdrawals made immediately before making the deposits either from the same bank account or other bank accounts. Further, some cash deposits have also been made by the assessee out of the advances received by him in cash from customers against sale of plots in the colony ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e corresponding cash inflows immediately before the making of cash deposits, as Annexure A- 4.01 to A-4.11 [PB Page No. 36 to 48]; ii) Copies of the relevant bank statements for the relevant previous year, as Annexure A-4.12 to A-4.23 [PB Page No. 49 to 120]; iii) Statement showing the details of the buyers from whom such advances were received by him during the relevant previous year and their corresponding details as regard to the registered sale deeds executed by the assessee in their favour, as Annexure A-4.24 [PB Page No. 121 to 124]; iv) Copies of registered sale deeds executed by the assessee in favour of the buyers, as Annexure A-4.25 to A-4.71 [PB Page No. 125 to 546]. 6.00 Your Honours, since the assessee was not granted sufficient opportunity of being heard during the course of the assessment proceedings, all these documents, furnished hereinabove, could not be furnished before the AO. It is submitted that since the aforesaid documents were quite vital to adjudicate the issue on hand, the same were furnished before the ld. CIT(A) as additional evidences along with an application under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. 7.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee or any of the documentary evidences so furnished by him. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the entire addition of Rs. 2,85,38,400/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits. The action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting of the impugned addition has been challenged by the Revenue before this Hon'ble Bench. 9.00 Your Honours, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it would be appreciated that the entire subject cash deposits of Rs. 2,72,14,700/- have been made by the assessee either out of the cash withdrawals made from the bank accounts or out of the advances received from various customers against sale of plots. Thus, in nutshell, the entire cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee have been made out of the explained sources only and therefore, no addition on this count is warranted. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is submitted that the addition of Rs. 2,85,38,400/- was rightly deleted by the ld. CIT(A) and therefore, the action of the ld. CIT(A) deserves to be upheld by this Hon'ble Bench and the Revenue's Ground on this issue deserves to be dismissed. E. Key Papers filed in the Paper....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the appellant was also making booking of plots and developing colonies. Further, from the body of the assessment order, it also emanates that during the course of survey u/s. 133A of the Act in the appellant's business premises on 21.09.2012, no incriminating material or document relating to the assessment year under consideration was found and the AO has not made reference of any such incriminating material. We find that the appellant, in his return, had shown income of Rs. 30,41,000/- and had also shown his turnover for the assessment year 2011-12 as per the registered sale deeds executed to the extent of Rs. 2,35,88,600/-. We find that in the remand report Ld.AO has not rebutted such factual statement of the appellant. Thus, in our view, the findings given by the AO, framing the assessment, that the appellant had not shown any sales in his return of income is factually incorrect. 8.3 It is generally accepted that in respect of any assessee carrying out business, the entire deposits made in his bank accounts cannot be regarded as the income of the assessee. A businessman is invariably required to incur corresponding expenses against the deposits made in bank accounts. S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....outflow of cash, details of the customers from whom advances were received and copies of the sale deeds, executed subsequently, could be said to be able to discharge his onus of establishing the sources of cash deposits made in his various bank accounts during the year under consideration. 8.6 In our considered view, it is a common practice in the real estate trade that a colonizer or builder enters into agreement with any customer for sale of properties, with the stipulation that the customer would make the payment of agreed sales consideration in installments. Further, only after receipt of the entire sales consideration, possession of the properties is handed over to the customer and sale deed is accordingly executed. The AO also, in the body of the assessment order, has given a finding that the appellant had launched various projects and in such projects, he was making bookings. Thus, the claim of the appellant that he had made deposits in his bank accounts out of final sales proceeds/advances received from customers, in cash, deserves to be accepted. Once an assessee is in a position to establish that during a particular year, he had received certain cash from explained sou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,37,000/- have been made out of the cash withdrawals from bank accounts themselves. 8.10 We therefore under the given facts and circumstances of the case , find no infirmity in the finding given by the ld. CIT(A) for deleting the addition of Rs. 2,85,38,400/- made by the Ld.AO on account of unexplained cash deposits under section 68 of the Act. Accordingly, the findings given by the ld. CIT(A) are upheld and Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue for A.Y. 2011-12 is hereby Dismissed. 9.Ground Nos. 2, Ground no.1 & Ground no.1 of the Revenue's Appeal for A.Ys. 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 9.1 Through these grounds of appeal, the revenue has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the additions of Rs. 30,00,000/-, Rs. 50,00,000/- and Rs. 1,40,04,961/- on account of additional surrendered income not shown by the assessee in ITR respectively for A.Ys. 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. Since all these grounds are involving same issue, the same are being dealt with here simultaneously. 9.2 Briefly stated facts of the issue, as culled out from the records, are that a survey under the provisions of s. 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....subject issue of taxability of the additional income surrendered during the course of the survey over and above that already shown in the returns of income, the ld. CIT(A) has granted full relief to the assessee for all the three assessment years. The ld. CIT(A) held that it was not the allegation of the Ld.AO that besides carrying out the business of real estate, the assessee was carrying out any other business and since on the date of survey, the books of account of the assessee were not complete, the income surrendered were only the estimated business income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further found that the assessee did not retract from his statement made under s.133A of the Act and on the contrary, has shown more income in his returns of income than that admitted by him during the course of the survey. The ld. CIT(A) further relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of S. Khader Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad) and further considering that the SLP filed by the Revenue against such decision got dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, held that any statement under s.133A which cannot be recorded on oath has no evidentiary value. Accordingly, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....age No. 21]. It is submitted that the aforesaid returned income of Rs. 30,41,000/- exclusively represents the business income of the assessee as admitted by him before the survey party. Thus, in other words, the assessee duly honored the admission made by him before the survey party. 2.00 Your Honours, the impugned addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- has been made by the learned AO over and above the returned income of Rs. 30,41,000/- shown by the assessee without considering the material fact that the assessee had already considered and incorporated the additional income in his return of income furnished for the relevant assessment year. 3.00 Your Honours, the aforesaid action of the learned AO has resulted into double addition in the hands of the assessee which cannot be upheld especially in a circumstance when the learned AO could not bring any adverse material on record to establish the fact that the assessee has derived such income of Rs. 30,00,000/- over and above the business income of Rs. 30,41,000/- already incorporated in the return of income for the relevant assessment year. 4.00 The ld. CIT(A) observed that as against the admitted income of Rs. 30,00,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under consideration. In our view, from such letter, it cannot be inferred that the assessee in any manner admitted the additional income over and above his regular business income. We also observe that as against the income of Rs. 30,00,000/-, Rs. 60,00,000/- and Rs. 2,25,00,000/- respectively for A.Y. 2011-12, A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14, the assessee had shown higher income amounting to Rs. 30,41,000/-, Rs. 64,37,450/- and Rs. 2,27,12,840/- respectively. Thus, it is not a case where the assessee has retracted his statement. Even otherwise, we are in full agreement with the finding of the ld. CIT(A) that statement recorded under s.133A of the Act by themselves have no evidentiary value in view of the judicial ruling of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of S. Khader Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad). We find that in the instant cases, the ld. AO based upon the material gathered during the course of the survey, has made separate additions and therefore, merely on the basis of the admission of the assessee, without having any other corroborative material on record, no addition could have been made. Accordingly, we find no infirmity in the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in delet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t filed return of income and therefore, the AO continued the proceedings by way of issuance of a notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act, on 08.09.2015 again requiring the assessee to file his return of income. The assessee did not respond to the Notice so issued again. Therefore, a questionnaire u/s. 142(1) was issued on 22.01.2016 fixing the date of compliance on 02.02.2016. As per AO, the assessee did not comply with the questionnaire also. The AO issued a final show cause notice on 03.03.2016 requiring the assessee to explain as to why an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- surrendered by him during the survey proceedings for the year under consideration should not be added to his total income, but, as per AO, the assessee did not respond. Finally, the AO framed the assessment u/s. 144 of the Act by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs. 3,45,79,400/- for the A.Y. 2011-12. 11.3 Aggrieved with the Order of Assessment, the assessee preferred an appeal for the assessment year under consideration before the ld. CIT(A). During the course of the first appellate proceedings, the assessee made detailed written submissions along with the documentary evidences. The ld. CIT(A) after consideri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....11) 331 ITR 483 (AllHC) vii) CIT vs. Bharat G Patel (2014) 88 CCH 0032 (GujHC) viii) Mohinder Kumar Chhabra vs. ITO (2014) 31 ITR (Trib.) 0093 (Del) ix) Addl. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. Vodithala Education Society (2015) 144 DTR (Hyd)(Trib) 0018 x) Suresh Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2016) 48 ITR 333 (Trib.Mum) xi) ACIT vs. Ravnet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (2017) 49 CCH 0156 (DelTrib) xii) Pr. CIT vs. Hindustan Candle Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (12) TMI 468 (BomHC) xiii) DCIT vs. Cameron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 2018 (11) TMI 873 (RajHC) xiv) PCIT, Kolkata vs.Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (6) TMI 1472 (KolHC) xv) PCIT, Mumbai vs. Shri Jawahar Hiranand Bhatia 2018 (3) TMI 1166 (BomHC) 12. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We note that in the case of the assessee, a Survey under s.133A had taken place on 21-09- 2012 and based upon the findings of the survey, a notice under s.148 was duly issued to the assessee after recording the reasons. We also observe that the ld. AO has clearly mentioned in the body of the assessment order that before issuance o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Rs. 20,18,30,178/- in the assessee's income on account of the excess of expenditure over the income for A.Y. 2012-13. 13.3 Aggrieved with the Order of Assessment, the assessee preferred an appeal for the assessment year under consideration before the ld. CIT(A). During the course of the first appellate proceedings, the assessee made detailed written submissions along with the documentary evidences. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, documentary evidences placed on record, remand reports submitted by the AO as well as the rejoinders of the assessee thereon, deleted the entire addition of Rs. 20,18,30,178/- made by the AO on account of excess of expenditure over income on the basis of notings found made in some diaries. The ld. CIT(A) has given the necessary findings from para (7.1) at page no. 64 to para (7.3.4) at page no. 72 of his Order for A.Y. 2012-13. 13.4 Besides deleting the aforesaid addition, the ld. CIT(A) by discarding the results shown by the assessee in his books of account, made an enhancement of income amounting to Rs. 25,88,306/- in the hands of the assessee by estimating the turnover of the assessee at Rs. 6,00,00,000....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the said diaries. According to the AO, the sources of such excess expenditure remained unexplained and therefore he made the addition of Rs. 20,18,30,178/- in the assessee's income. 3.01 Your Honours, at the outset, it is submitted that the subject diaries BI-13 & BI-16 are pertaining to two financial years i.e. F.Y. 2011-12 (A.Y.2012-13) and F.Y. 2012-13 (A.Y. 2013-14) as against the same erroneously presumed by the learned AO as pertaining to only one financial year i.e. F.Y. 2011-12 (A.Y. 2012-13). On a perusal of the subject diaries, it shall be observed that the notings in the subject diaries have been made from Diwali 2011 (28-10-2011) to Diwali 2012 (13-11- 2012). Thus, the total receipts and payments as noted by the learned AO fall to two different financial years pertaining to two different assessment years. 3.02 Your Honours, the learned AO further made a gross error of principle by holding that the subject two diaries, impounded as BI-13 and BI-16, represent the complete set of books of account of the assessee and contained notings of all the business transactions carried out by the assessee during the relevant previous year. The learned AO, misrebally,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yments, which are given in a tabular form as under: Diary No. F.Y. A.Y. Receipts Payments BI-13 2011-12 2012-13 19,76,525 7,42,200 BI-16 2011-12 2012-13 11,69,12,830 22,15,12,116 Sub-Total (A) 11,88,89,355 22,22,54,316 BI-13 2012-13 2013-14 23,02,880 8,06,660 BI-16 2012-13 2013-14 19,27,38,490 28,94,74,452 Sub-Total (B) 19,50,41,370 29,02,81,112 Grand Total (A+B) 31,39,30,725 51,25,35,428 Total Amount as per Assesment Order 31,45,77,945 51,64,08,123 3.05 Your Honours, the working of the figures given in the table above have been made by the assessee from extracting the day to day jottings made in the impounded diaries, in an excel sheet. A copy of the excel sheets, containing the details of the day to day working of impounded diaries, is placed at PB Page No. 80 to 97. 4.00 Your Honours, before proceeding further to explain the sources of expenditure of Rs. 51,25,35,428/-, as against the total receipts of Rs. 31,39,30,725/-, it would be apt to note that all the transactions which have been jotted down in the said diaries BI-13 & BI-16 are duly r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the financial years, submitted before him, in a separate Volume-3, marked as 'Bank Statements'. It is submitted that all the payments through bank accounts have duly been made by the assessee out of his disclosed bank accounts and all the banking transactions are duly recorded in the books of account maintained by the assessee. It is submitted that the major source of receipts in various bank accounts of the assessee was sale proceeds/advance receipts against the sale of properties. As the assessee has made the payments through banking channels and has also made recording thereof in his books of accounts, no adverse cognizance in respect of such payments ought to have been made by the learned AO. 5.02 Your Honours, the sources of aggregate cash payments, made by the assessee, as per the subject two diaries are explained in a summarized form as under: A.Y. Cash Payments towards purchase of Lands/to contractors / for other development expenses Cash deposited in Bank Accounts Payment towards imprest account Total Cash Payments Cash receipts from various Customers, either as Sales/Advance receipts against sale of properties Withdrawals from Banks Rece....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the relevant abstracts of the copies of the Registered Sale Deeds, executed subsequently, by the assessee, which were submitted before the ld. CIT(A) in a separate Volume - 4, marked as 'Registered Sale Deeds'. It is further submitted that the authenticity of the claim of the assessee, as regard to receipt of advances from various customers, can very well be verified by Your Honours from the copy of the Audited Financial Statements of the assessee for the financial year 2011-12 [refer PB Page No.40], in Schedule-7 of 'Advance Against Sale of Properties' at Rs. 30,19,88,287/- has been reflected. It shall be appreciated that even the ld. AO, in the body of impugned assessment order at Para (10) has given a finding that the assessee had shown sundry creditors and advances against properties, to the extent of Rs. 30,33,70,927/-, which inter alia includes the above stated amount of advances received from customers at Rs. 30,19,88,287/-. 6.00 Your Honours, on a perusal of the column no. 9 of the table given at Para 5.02, supra, it shall be observed that after excluding the transactions carried out through banking channels, there remained a cash deficiency i.e. excess of cash ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee before the AO are placed at page no. 52 to 56 of our Paper Book prepared separately in respect of Remand Proceedings. Further, the AO has submitted his remand reports before the ld. CIT(A) on two occasions. The Remand Reports dated 21-06-2019 and 28-07-2020 have been respectively placed at page no. 11 to 20 and 113 to 121 of our separate Paper Book for Remand Proceedings. In response to the aforesaid Remand Reports, the assessee had also filed his rejoinders vide his two letters dated 12-07-2019 and 20-08-2020 which are also placed at page no. 42 to 45 and 134 to 146 respectively in our separate Paper Book for Remand Proceedings. 8.01 The ld. CIT(A) has dealt with the subject issue at Para (7.1) at page no. 64 to Para (7.3.4) at page no. 72 of his Order. The ld. CIT(A) noted that the sole ground taken by the AO for making the addition is that on the basis of summaries prepared from the notings made in the two diaries inventorized as BI-13 & BI-16, the AO found that the amount of expenditure (sic. Payments) noted in such diaries was more than the amount of income (sic. Receipts) recorded in the same, by a sum of Rs. 20,18,30,178/-. 8.02 The ld. CIT(A) furth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of the plots, but, in most of the cases, the replies were not received. As per the ld. CIT(A), the AO also commented that in some cases, original letters had got unserved and in some cases, where the replies have been received the dates of payments were not mentioned and the AO further commented that the assessee had shown turnover of Rs. 4,66,88,800/- only in his financial statements whereas the various receipts found noted in the said diaries were to the extent of Rs. 11,44,90,355/- and therefore, the same cannot be said to be fully reconciled, especially in a circumstance when the assessee himself is claiming that the diaries so found were not his complete records. 8.04 The ld. CIT(A), after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, was of the view that the assessee could said to be able to establish that the said diaries, impounded and inventorized as BI-13 and BI-16, during the course of the survey proceedings carried out in the business premises of the assessee, do not pertain to only one assessment year i.e. the assessment year under consideration, but, they factually pertain to two assessment years viz. A.Y. 2012-13 (under appeal) and A.Y. 2013-14.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee in his financial statements. As regard the remaining cash payments of Rs. 12,98,75,988/- made by the assessee during the relevant previous year, as per the jottings made in the said diaries, the ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee has claimed to have received a sum of Rs. 8,08,16,355/- from his various customers against sale of properties either as advance or full payment. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that in support of such assertion, the assessee has furnished various documentary evidences giving the names and addresses of the customers from whom the sum was received. The assessee has also furnished the status of such advances and as per the ld. CIT(A), in most of the cases, the sale deeds against the advances received have already been executed by the assessee in favour of the concerning customers. The ld. CIT(A) also found that it is not the case of the AO that any of the customers to whom a letter u/s. 133(6) of the Act was issued by her, during the course of the remand proceedings, denied the making of payments by him to the assessee or purchase of any property by him from the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) considered the rejoinder made by the assessee contending that first ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on quid-pro-quo basis only. Thus, As per the ld. CIT(A), the assessee could be able to establish that the sum of Rs. 8,08,16,355/- was received by him out of realization from customers. Further, the ld. CIT(A) noted that by way of furnishing the date wise details of cash withdrawals made by the assessee from his various bank accounts along with the copies of the bank statements, the assessee could said to able to substantiate his claim of meeting the sources of payments noted down in the diaries out of the cash so withdrawn. Upon going through the impounded diaries, the ld. CIT(A) found that the claim of the assessee to the effect that in such diaries, on payment sides, some jottings were made which were not pertaining to payments made to any outsiders, but were only pertaining to the transactions taken in-house i.e. between the clerk/cashier recording the transactions and the assessee or his wife. Thus, as per the ld. CIT(A), the assessee could be able to explain the sources of cash payments aggregating to a sum of Rs. 12,98,75,988/- found noted in the diaries, for the assessment year under consideration. 8.06 The ld. CIT(A) further noted that the diaries BI-13 and BI-16....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich the assessee wish to place reliance: S. No. Description of the document Page No. 1 A copy of the day-to-day summary of excel sheets, containing the details of the day to day working of impounded diaries viz BI-13 & BI-16 80-97 2 A consolidated statement of transactions noted in BI-13 & BI-16, which in its turn, is based upon the day to day working of the diary in the excel sheets 98-100 3 Statement showing day wise details of cash deposits made in various bank accounts 101-104 4 Statement showing day wise details of cash withdrawals from various bank accounts 105-110 5 Statement showing details of cash receipt from various customers 111-116 6 1ST Remand Report of the AO dated 21-06-2019 for the A.Y. 2012-13 11 to 20 of Remand Report PB 7 1ST Rejoinder of the assessee dated 12-07-2019 for the A.Y. 2012-13 42 to 45 of Remand Report PB 8 2ND Remand Report of the AO dated 28-07-2020 for the A.Y. 2012-13 113 to 121 of Remand Report PB 9 2ND Rejoinder of the assessee dated 20-08-2020 for the A.Y. 2012-13 134 to 146 of Remand Report PB REGARDING ENHANCEMENT OF INCOME AT Rs. 25,88,306/- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the above, the estimation of net profit at the flat rate of 15% by the ld. CIT(A) is quite excessive and arbitrary considering the nature of trade and net profit already shown and accepted by the Revenue in the assessee's own case for earlier assessment years. It is submitted that the assessee had shown a net profit of 9.33% for the relevant assessment year [refer PB Page No. 35] from his business. Thus, the estimation of net profit @15% by the ld. CIT(A) is excessive. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is submitted that the enhancement of income so made by the ld. CIT(A) by estimating the turnover of the assessee at Rs. 6,00,00,000/- as against the same shown by the assessee at Rs. 4,66,88,800/- and estimating a net profit @15% thereon without any basis whatsoever, deserves to be set aside and no interference be made in respect of the book results declared by the assessee in his audited books of account." 14.1 We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We find that the sole ground taken by the AO for making the addition is that on the basis of summaries prepared from the notings made in the two diaries inventorized as BI-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of transactions noted in both the diaries, statement of day wise details of cash deposits made in various bank accounts (placed at paper book page no. 101 to 104) as well as cash withdrawals made from various bank accounts (placed at paper book page no.105 to 110). The assesse has also furnished a statement of cash receipts from various customers (placed at paper book page no. 111 to 116) showing that the working of amounts of receipts and payments determined by the AO, on the basis of the said diaries, was not correct. The Ld,AR further submitted that all the jottings made in the diaries are duly recorded in his regular books of account which have been completed and finalized after the date of the survey and based upon such books of accounts, he had drawn his financial statements for the relevant year and the same were audited by a firm of qualified chartered accountants and further the same were also duly uploaded by him electronically along with the return of income for the relevant assessment year. The copy of such financial statements has also been filed before us at page no. 22 to 43 of the paper book. The Ld.AR further contended that out of the aggregate payments of Rs. 51,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d.AR, although the said diaries were not containing the complete records of all the financial transactions carried out by him during the relevant previous year, but, even if such diaries are considered to be complete records then also there would result a deficiency of only a sum of Rs. 1,53,85,633/- for the year under consideration. Whereas, in the next assessment year, there has resulted a surplus of Rs. 1,55,35,910/-. According to Ld.AR, the very reason for working out of the deficiency of Rs. 1,53,85,633/- was that the said diaries were not his complete records and many of the transactions of receipts and payments, which were duly recorded in the regular books of account were not so noted down in the said diaries and the same are summarized in a tabular form reproduced as under: A.Y. Cash Payments towards purchase of Lands/to contractors / for other development expenses Cash deposited in Bank Accounts Payment towards imprest account Total Cash Payments Cash receipts from various Customers, either as Sales/Advance receipts against sale of properties Withdrawals from Banks Receipts from Imprest Account Total Cash Receipts Cash Surplus/(Deficiency) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s which were utilized for making the payments, the AO has merely stated that the notices u/s. 133(6) were issued to the purchaser of the plots, but, in most of the cases, the replies were not received. 14.4 We also observe that the aforesaid two diaries were not the complete records of all the financial transactions carried out by the appellant during the relevant previous year, but, these were containing only part of many of the records maintained by the appellant. Ld.AR is claiming that all the transactions noted in such diaries are duly recorded in his regular books of accounts and on the basis of such books of accounts only, the financial statements were prepared and filed along with the return. However, even if such an assertion of the appellant is not accepted at its face value, then also, one will have to place complete reliance on the impounded diaries based upon which the impugned addition has been made by the AO. We find that for explaining the sources of expenditure, as noted in the said diaries, the appellant has furnished the necessary documentary evidences and the AO has not found any material defect or discrepancy in such documentary evidences. The submission of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the appellant by the AO. Ld.AR contended that the very reason for return of the notices might be that in the last 8-10 years, they might have changed their addresses. It was also contended that having handed over the possession of the properties sold to the customers after execution of the registered sale deeds, the customers were not in his control and therefore, he could not have compelled the customers to comply with the letters issued u/s. 133(6) of the Act. We find that it is not the case of the AO that any of the customers who responded to the notices issued u/s. 133(6) denied to have made payment of advances to the appellant. Further, in our view, the transactions of payments by the customers to the appellant have been taken place almost 10-12 years back, no adverse inference can be drawn only on the basis that the customers who have responded the notices and confirmed the transactions, did not mention the exact dates of payments by them. In our view, it is a common practice in the real estate trade that a colonizer or builder enters into agreement with any customer for sale of properties with the stipulation that the customer would make the payment of agreed sales conside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tant case, although the AO has not invoked any specific provision of the Act for making the impugned addition, but, in such circumstances, the provisions of s. 69C of the Act could have been invoked. But, again, such addition u/s. 69C can be made only if an assessee has incurred certain expenditure and for incurring such expenditure, he fails to satisfactorily explain the sources. We find that by furnishing ample of the documentary evidences, the appellant could said to be able to explain the sources of receipts jotted down in the diaries. Even otherwise, we find that while making the impugned addition, the AO himself has admitted the sources of receipts in the hands of the appellant as noted down in the diaries. The AO has made addition only because the sum of receipts made in such diaries was lesser than the sum of the payments so noted. We find that on the basis of the financial statements for the year under consideration, as furnished by the appellant, there is no case of excess or unexplained payment over the explained sources of receipts. In such view of matter, in our opinion, the addition of Rs. 20,18,30,178/- so made by the AO has no substance and the same has rightly been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 64,11,694/- for A.Y. 2012-13 and Rs. 2,28,03,647/- for A.Y. 2013-14. If the total taxable business income shown by the assessee in his returns of income are compared with the total turnover of the assessee, for A.Y. 2012-13, it works out to be 13.73% and for A.Y. 2013-14, the same works out to be at 22.43% which is quite higher than that estimated by the ld. CIT(A) at the flat rate of 15%. Thus, we find no merit in the action of the ld. CIT(A) in estimating the turnover as well as the net profit rate. Accordingly, the enhancement of Rs. 25,88,306/- and Rs. 11,96,353/- respectively made by the ld. CIT(A) for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14, are fully deleted. Consequently, Ground Nos. 1(a) to 1(d) for A.Y. 2012-13 and Ground Nos. 2(a) to 2(d) for A.Y. 2013-14 of the assessee are allowed. 15. Ground Nos. 3 and 2 of the Revenue for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 15.1 Through these grounds of appeal, the revenue has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the additions of Rs. 1,25,79,722/- and Rs. 1,08,26,047/- respectively for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 made by the AO on account of ad-hoc disallowance of various expenses claimed by the assessee. According to the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en synopsis. The relevant portion of such synopsis is being reproduced as under: "For A.Y. 2012-13: D. Key Points of Assessee's Submission and Relevant Pages of the Paper Book: In this context, it is submitted as under : 1.00 That, the assessee had claimed expenditure on account of various expenses. These expenses were shown in the audited Profit & Loss Account of the assessee [refer PB Page No. 42]. The assessee was maintaining complete details in respect of all the expenses so incurred and the same were also supported by the necessary documentary evidences. However, the learned AO, on the basis of non-furnishing of bills/ vouchers for verification, made an ad-hoc addition of Rs. 1,25,79,722/- in the hands of the assessee by making disallowance of @30% of the various expenses claimed to have been incurred by the assessee for the relevant assessment year. 2.00 No ad-hoc disallowance was warranted in view of the following facts and circumstances: (i) The assessee had maintained regular books of account, in his ordinary course of business, in which all the transactions are fully and truly recorded and they are also vouched and ope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(v) The assessee was also required to incur bank charges in respect of charges for transactions carried out through his various bank accounts. A copy of the ledger account of Bank Charges is placed at PB Page No. 155 to 158. (vi) Further, in order to sell the properties in his various projects, the assessee was required to avail services of various brokers and commission agents. In consideration of availing such services the assessee was required to incur expenses towards brokerage and commission. It is submitted that during the relevant previous year, the assessee had shown sales aggregating to a sum of Rs. 4,66,88,800/- and for effecting such sales, he was required to make payment of brokerage of Rs. 36,00,000/- as shown in the Schedule 16 of the Audited Financial Statements. A copy of the statement showing details of payment of brokerage is placed at PB Page No. 159. 3.00 The Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Amrapali International vs. ACIT (2012) 31 CCH 403 DelTrib has held that without bringing on record any specific instance that the vouchers are not maintained or the expenses are not related to the business of the assessee no lump-sum disallowance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure of the net profit which is not possible in the line of trade of the assessee. It is submitted that, after adding the amount of disallowance of expenses at Rs. 1,25,79,722/- to the taxable net profit of Rs. 64,11,694/- shown by the assessee, there would result an exorbitantly high net profit of Rs. 1,89,91,416/-, thereby resulting into a Net Profit rate of nearly 40.67% , which, even by applying any exaggeration, can be said to a real or achievable profit by a person dealing in real estate. It is submitted that the ad-hoc additions so made by the ld. AO, by way of disallowance of expenses, deserves to be deleted on this count alone. 5.00 Your Honours, since in the appelant's case, the assessment has been framed under s. 144 of the Act, without affording any reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the assessee could not furnish certain documentary evidences before the ld. AO. It is submitted that since the aforesaid documents were quite vital to adjudicate the issue on hand, the same were furnished before the ld. CIT(A) as additional evidences along with an application under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. 6.00 Your Honours, the entire sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses claimed by the assessee. Accordingly, the addition of Rs. 1,25,79,722/- made by the AO on account of ad-hoc disallowance of expenses was fully deleted by the ld. CIT(A). The action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting of the impugned addition has been challenged by the Revenue before this Hon'ble Bench. In view of the above facts and circumstances, without accepting the action of the ld. CIT(A) in estimating the net profit @15%, it is submitted that the addition of Rs. 1,25,79,722/- was rightly deleted by the ld. CIT(A) and therefore, the action of the ld. CIT(A) deserves to be upheld by this Hon'ble Bench and the Revenue's Ground on this issue deserves to be dismissed. E. Key Papers filed in the Paper Book on which the assessee wish to place reliance: S. No. Description of the document Page No. 1 Audited Profit & Loss Account of the assessee 42 2 A copy of statement showing the date wise and description wise details of material expenditure amounting to Rs. 2,22,60,112/-, and as also, a copy of statement showing details of payments made to labour contractors at Rs. 70,13,230/- 117-124 3 Copies of statements/ledger accounts showing det....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... guess work, has made the disallowance which is not permissible in the eyes of the law. Thus, we find no infirmity in the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the entire ad-hoc additions on this count made by the AO. Consequently, the Ground Nos. 3 & 2 of the Revenue respectively for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 are hereby dismissed. 17. Ground Nos. 4 and 3 of the Revenue for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 17.1 Through these grounds of appeal, the revenue has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the additions of Rs. 9,10,11,278/- and Rs. 4,96,06,927/- respectively for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 made by the AO on account of bogus sundry creditors and advances against properties shown by the assessee in his financial statements. According to the AO, the assessee had been provided ample opportunities to explain the same along with the documentary evidences. However, the assessee did not respond and comply with the notices and did not file any details or furnished any documentary evidence to substantiate the claim of aforesaid creditors. Accordingly, the AO made an ad-hoc addition of Rs. 9,10,11,278/- @30% of the total creditors of Rs. 30,33,70,927/- for A.Y. 20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ous customers who are intended to buy any plot or project in the colony under development. 2.00 It is submitted that during the previous year under consideration, the assessee was developing as many as six colonies, titled as 'Madan Vihar Colony', 'Madan Vihar Extension', 'Royal Estate Colony', 'Royal Residencey Colony', 'Royal Town Colony' and 'Shree Royal Town Colony'. The assessee, pending the completion of development work and as also pending execution of the sale deed, had received advance money from various customers. At the end of the relevant year, the assessee was having advances aggregating to a sum of Rs. 30,19,88,287/-. The project wise details of such advances have been given in the Schedule - 7 of the Audited Financial Statements of the assessee, for the relevant previous year [refer PB Page No.40]. 2.01 It is submitted that, most of the advances from the customers were received by the assessee through banking channels only and details of each and every receipt of advance, have fully been maintained and recorded in the books of account of the assessee. 3.00 Your Honours, the factum of receipt of advances by the assessee from various customer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... payee cheques, and such receipts, with full details, were duly recorded by the assessee in his books of account. 5.00 Your Honours, in the instant case, the ld. AO, without giving any basis, merely on surmises and conjectures, held 30% of the advances shown by the assessee in his books of account at Rs. 30,33,70,927/- as income of the assessee. Accordingly, the AO vide Para (10) of his Order, made an addition of Rs. 9,10,11,278/- in the assessee's income. 6.00 Your Honours, the only ground taken by the ld. AO, for making the impugned addition is that during the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee had not filed any documentary evidences confirming receipt of advances. In this regard, it is submitted that during the course of the assessment proceedings, before the ld. AO, the assessee had produced copies of the booking forms, duly signed by the various customers, who made booking in the assessee's various projects. Besides, in order to establish the identity of the customers and the genuineness of the transactions of booking advances, had also produced the copies of the various sales deeds, executed by the assessee, in subsequent years, in favour of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e ld. CIT(A) on two occasions. The Remand Reports dated 21-06-2019 and 28-07-2020 have been respectively placed at page no. 11 to 20 and 113 to 121 of our separate Paper Book for Remand Proceedings. In response to the aforesaid Remand Reports, the assessee had also filed his rejoinders vide his two letters dated 12-07-2019 and 20-08-2020 which are also placed at page no. 42 to 45 and 134 to 146 respectively in our separate Paper Book for Remand Proceedings. 9.01 The ld. CIT(A) noted that the assessee by furnishing all the necessary details with documentary evidences could said to be able to substantiate the sundry creditors, as appearing in the audited balance sheet, as on 31/03/2012. As per ld. CIT(A), the furnishing of various documentary evidences by the assessee have duly been accepted by the AO making the Remand Report. The ld. CIT(A) noted that the AO has not found any specific discrepancy or defect in the documents or details furnished by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that the assessee had maintained regular books of account and the same were also audited u/s.44AB of the Act. As per the ld. CIT(A), the AO himself, while framing the assessment, has gi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... customers might have changed their addresses. 9.03 The ld. CIT(A) also found merit in the contention that having handed over the possession of the properties sold to the customers, after execution of the registered sale deeds, the customers were not in the control of the assessee and therefore, the assessee could not have compelled the customers to comply with the letters issued u/s. 133(6) of the Act. Further, in view of ld. CIT(A), the transactions of payments by the customers to the assessee have been taken place almost 10-12 years back, no adverse inference can be drawn only on the basis that the customers who have responded the notices and confirmed the transactions, did not mention the exact dates of payments by them. As per ld. CIT(A), every customer cannot be expected to have date wise details of payments made by him of a transaction which has taken place long back. It is a common practice in the real estate trade that a colonizer or builder enters into agreement with any customer for sale of properties, with the stipulation that the customer would make the payment of agreed sales consideration in installments. Further, only after receipt of the entire sales consi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....percentage of the total creditors, is neither warranted nor permissible. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) found no substance in the ad-hoc addition of Rs. 9,10,11,278/- made by the AO in the income of the assessee and accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the entire addition of Rs. 9,10,11,278/-. The action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting of the impugned addition has been challenged by the Revenue before this Hon'ble Bench. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is submitted that the addition of Rs. 9,10,11,278/- was rightly deleted by the ld. CIT(A) and therefore, the action of the ld. CIT(A) deserves to be upheld by this Hon'ble Bench and the Revenue's Ground on this issue deserves to be dismissed. E. Key Papers filed in the Paper Book on which the assessee wish to place reliance: S. No. Description of the document Page No. 1 Audited Balance Sheet of the assessee 40 2 Copies of specimen application forms, duly filled up and signed by the various customers, who had given advances to the assessee against booking of plots in various colonies developed by the assessee 160-171 3 A statement showing the details of the booking advances aggreg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated statement of advances against properties under the various projects in his Paper Books contending that out of the total creditors outstanding as on 31/03/2012, advances amounting to Rs. 10,18,75,171/- were lying as opening balances and the same were not received during the year under consideration. The appellant has also furnished the copies of the registered sale deeds subsequently executed. The appellant further contended that out of the total advances received during the previous year relevant to A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14, a substantial sum was received through banking channels and only the balancing sum was received in cash. The appellant also agitated the making of the addition on the legal ground that since as per the AO's own version, during the course of the assessment proceedings, the appellant had not produced any books of account and therefore, the question of finding any credit entry as regard to the sundry creditors and consequently, the question of invoking the provisions of section 68 does not arise. According to the appellant, finding of some entries in the books of account are sine-qua-non for invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act. 18.2 We f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urse of the survey proceedings, the booking forms were found in the premises of the appellant. In the line of the business of the appellant, it is a usual practice that the payments against sale of properties take place in installments and till the full and final payment is received, the possession is not handed over and sale deed is also not executed. Thus, for an assessee, following the mercantile system of accounting, till the sale is recognized upon receipt of full payment and handing over of the possession, it continues to be shown in the books as advances only. In our view, the amount of advances would be taxable when they would partake the character of revenue and when the sale is fructified and not on any earlier occasion, otherwise, the same would result into taxation of the same receipts twice which is not permissible in the law. We find that the appellant has furnished the complete details of sundry creditors and has also furnished the necessary documents in support of such details. We find that in most of the cases of advances, sale deeds have subsequently been executed in favor of the customers. In such circumstances, in our considered opinion, per se, the genuineness ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f credits relating to sales proceeds, the onus of an assessee is relatively lighter to establish the creditworthiness of the transactions as all such transactions takes place on quid-pro-quo basis only. Thus, in our considered opinion, the appellant could be able to establish the receipt of advances from various customers during the year under consideration. The appellant submitted that during the course of remand proceedings, he had furnished the details of advances lying as opening balance, details of advances received during the respective years giving break-up of advances received through banking channels and in the form of cash and as also, closing balances of creditors before the AO. Such details were also furnished before us during the course of the appellate proceedings. We find that the existence of customers is established by the execution of sale deeds in their favor and therefore, the existence of opening balance cannot be ruled out. We also find merit in the contention of the appellant that since for the earlier years, he had opted for presumptive taxation under section 44D of the Act and therefore, he was not statutorily required to maintain any books of account but, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontext, it is submitted as under : 1.00 That, at the outset, it is submitted that the learned AO never served a valid notice under s.143(2) of the Act to the assessee. 2.00 That, on a perusal of the first para of the assessment order, it would be observed that according to the learned AO, the first Notice dated 05-09-2014 under s.143(2) of the Act for the relevant assessment year was issued to the assessee and was served upon the assessee. In the body of the assessment order, the ld. AO has not brought any details as regard to the date on which the Notice under s. 143(2), alleged to be issued, was served upon the assessee. 3.00 Your Honour, the fact remained that, as per assessee, no notice was ever served upon him. Since, the very first notice issued under s. 143(2) of the Act, did not get served upon the assessee, the ld. AO was not legally competent and having jurisdiction to carry out the assessment proceedings and under such circumstances, the assessee chose not to participate in the assessment proceedings so carried out illegally. 3.01 Your Honours, in evidence of the assertion of the assessee to the effect that no Notice under s. 143(2) da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Department of Income Tax (2017) 391 ITR 0031 (Patna) iv) UP Hotels Ltd. vs. CIT (2016) 283 CTR 0417 (All.) v) CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma (2010) 336 ITR 678 (AllHC) vi) ITO vs. M/s. NVS Builders Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 3729/Del/2012 vide Order dated 08-03-2018] vii) ITO vs. Shri Neeraj Goel 2018 (3) TMI 668 (ITAT Del) viii) ITO vs. Naseman Farms Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 44 CCH 0003 (DelTrib) ix) TML Drivelines Ltd. vs. DCIT, Mumbai 2018 (2) TMI 1516 (ITAT Mum) x) Virendra Dev Dixit vs. ACIT (2011) 331 ITR 483 (AllHC) xi) CIT vs. Bharat G Patel (2014) 88 CCH 0032 (GujHC) xii) Mohinder Kumar Chhabra vs. ITO (2014) 31 ITR (Trib.) 0093 (Del) xiii) Addl. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. Vodithala Education Society (2015) 144 DTR (Hyd)(Trib) 0018 xiv) Suresh Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2016) 48 ITR 333 (Trib.Mum) xv) ACIT vs. Ravnet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (2017) 49 CCH 0156 (DelTrib) xvi) Pr. CIT vs. Hindustan Candle Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (12) TMI 468 (BomHC) xvii) DCIT vs. Cameron Singapore Pte. Ltd. 2018 (11) TMI 873 (RajHC) xviii) PCIT, Kolkata vs.O....