TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1285
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) held as follows: 4.1 Ground No. 1 to 3: Through these grounds of appeal the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs. 2,06,93,612/- on account of profit on on-money. The appellant is engaged in the business of construction and development of immovable housing projects. Assessments for the assessment years 2007-08 to 2013-14 in case of the assessee were pending. The appellant moved settlement applications seeking to resolve the disputes with Revenue arising in the said pending assessments for the said assessment years. In the settlement applications, the appellant had made additional disclosures of undisclosed incomes. It had admitted to have received on- money through sale of the housing properties. The disclosure of undisclosed income during settlement proceedings after search u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, relating to those earlier assessment years does not lead to similar undisclosed income for other subsequent assessment year. 4.1.1 The AO could not telescope additional disclosures for particular years in settlement proceedings and made addition in subsequent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... relevant Financial year. However, the said material cannot be made the basis for working out the income for other years for which no incriminating documents or entries were found. The appellant further relied on the decision in the case of Principal CIT vs. Income-Tax Settlement Commission and another; 409 ITR 495 (Guj) where in it was held that additional disclosure of undisclosed income for one assessment year during settlement proceedings, does not amount to untrue disclosure for other assessment years under settlement proceedings. Commission accepting disclosures made by assessees and passing orders on their settlement applications. Order of Settlement Commission not erroneous. 4.1.5 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its several decisions have held that the principle of res judicata is inapplicable in tax matters and the general rule is not to apply this doctrine. In Installment Supply P Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 53, Hon'ble Apex Court held that in the tax matters, there is no question of res judicata because each year's assessment is final only for that year and does not govern later years. In Radhaswami Satsang 193 ITR 321, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that each as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be made in the hands of the appellant. When the evidence is found the same is to be restricted for that part only. The evidence cannot be used for extrapolation the receipt for balance period. No evidence has been brought on record to established that the same practice has been followed by the appellant subsequently. The addition is to be made for the period for which incriminating documents were found. The evidence for one year cannot be utilized for another year to estimate the income. The evidence found during the course of search could not be utilized for extrapolation of income for the relevant financial year. The said material cannot be made the basis for working out the income in the hands of appellant for other years for which not incriminating document were found during the course of search. Therefore, the addition made by the A.O. amounting to Rs. 2,06,93,612/- is Deleted. Therefore, the appeal on these grounds is Allowed. 4. Aggrieve against the same, the Revenue is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal: (1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,06,93,612/- made by Assessing Of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....documents were impounded. Soon thereafter there was a Search action u/s.132 of the Act on 30.11.2012 and seized several documents. It was thereafter the assessee, its Associated Firm and its Partners approached the Income Tax Settlement Commission for various assessment years [in assessee's case relating to the Asst. Yrs. 2011-12 to 2013-14] and offered the receipt of on-money of 30% of its Total receipts as additional income and settled the cases. 6.1. It is further seen from records that during the assessment proceedings for the present assessment year 2014-15 the Ld AO asked for the details of purchasers from whom booking advance is received as on date of search namely 30-11-2012. In reply the assessee provided the list of purchasers who booked before search and the receipts from them amounted to Rs. 14,14,23,445/= [which are available at pages 106 to 115 of the Paper Book]. After the Search action the assessee revised the prices of the flats/plots and submitted comparative price changes of various projects of the assessee, wherein there is a difference of 30% increase in price of flats/plots which are ranging from Rs. 289 to Rs. 1150/= for each projects namely Atlantis Duplexs....