2025 (9) TMI 126
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respondent-assessee. 3. It is brought to the notice that at the time of the final submissions also the appellant failed to appear. In view of the said perusal, we heard the learned DR appearing for the department-applicant. It is submitted on behalf of the Department that vide the impugned show cause notice, the demand was raised on several counts. Final order has dealt with 4 counts thereof. However, there are no findings on the following issues:- (i) the amount received on account of construction of the flats (Manglam Build Developers Limited). (ii) advances received from Customers; and (iii) flat booking amount received with respect to Aradhna Residency. Since, it amounts to be an error apparent on the face of records. The necessar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es (ii) With respect to legal and professional consultancy (iii) Construction of 18 individual residential houses (iv) With respect to the amount of remuneration paid to the Directors This perusal clarities that three other counts/grounds mentioned in the order dated 17.07.2015 as has been adjudicated vide the impugned final order, have not dealt with in the impugned final order bearing No. 54521 of 2024 dated 06.02.2024. 5. It has been the settled position of law that whenever binding decisions and the submissions are pointed out specifically, but the same were not been relied upon nor considered by the adjudicating authority it will tantamount to be the error apparent on face of records as was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Ker....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... entitled for the benefit of abatement vis-à-vis the amount received on account of construction of flats of Manglam Build Developers Limited. 9B. With respect to the amount of advances received from the customers and received towards flat booking Aradhna Residency, the original adjudicating authority has observed as follows:- "Moreover, I find that during the course of an earlier proceedings before me which were decided vide OIO No. 138/13-14 dated 28.03.2014 the assessee had submitted copies of all these agreements excepting one relating to shiv temple and claimed that total amounts involved in the 17 out of the above said 18 agreements was received by them during the period upto 2010-11. However, now the assessee has again subm....
TaxTMI
TaxTMI