9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 1291 - AT - Income TaxProceedings u/s 153C - rework the addition after giving credit for proportionate expenditure on account of pending works for this year and also giving credit for appellant s returned income on account of sale of flats as directed by CIT(A) - Held that - We have considered the submissions of the learned DR. We find that additional cost on incomplete project based on photograph may not be acceptable. No reasons were adduced for not filing the evidence filed before CIT(A), before the AO. We therefore direct the AO to rework the addition if any after careful consideration of cost records from the assessee. The assessee is therefore directed to submit the factual information and proper cost records to the Assessing Officer not merely the photograph so as to substantiate its claim. The assessee is also given liberty to file proper estimation from registered valuer. To carry out the above direction of the bench the entire issue is restored on the file of the AO - Decided in favour of Revenue for statistical purpose.
Issues:
1. Assessment based on documents seized during a search operation. 2. Completion method for cost and revenue computation in a construction project. 3. Addition of income based on incomplete project works. 4. Appeal against CIT(A) order regarding estimation of pending works. 5. Non-appearance of the assessee during the appeal hearing. Issue 1: Assessment based on documents seized during a search operation The appeal by the Revenue was against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) relating to the assessment year 2007-08. The assessee, an individual, was linked to documents found during a search operation under section 132 of the Income-tax Act 1961. The proceedings under section 153C of the Act were initiated, and the assessee filed a return of income for the assessment year 2007-08. However, the assessment was completed without the submission of books of accounts, relying on available information. Issue 2: Completion method for cost and revenue computation in a construction project The construction project, 'Soundarya Nivas,' was undertaken by the assessee, involving the purchase of a site and construction of apartments. The husband of the assessee handled project-related matters and provided cost and revenue computation based on the percentage of completion method. The project's completion percentages and corresponding costs and revenues were presented for different assessment years, leading to the declaration of income by the assessee for the relevant years. Issue 3: Addition of income based on incomplete project works The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition to the income based on calculations submitted by the assessee. However, during the appeal hearing with the CIT(A), the assessee highlighted pending works related to the project, 'Soundarya Nivas,' which were not considered earlier. The CIT(A) directed the AO to rework the addition after accounting for pending works and the income declared by the assessee from the sale of flats. Issue 4: Appeal against CIT(A) order regarding estimation of pending works The department appealed against the CIT(A) order, arguing that the additional cost based on photographs of incomplete works was not sufficient evidence. The department emphasized that the addition of income was based on the submissions made by the assessee's husband, which were binding due to his deposition under section 131 of the Act. The Tribunal directed the AO to reevaluate any additions after considering proper cost records and factual information from the assessee. Issue 5: Non-appearance of the assessee during the appeal hearing Despite notice, the assessee did not appear during the appeal hearing. The Tribunal proceeded to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the submissions of the learned DR. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of submitting factual information and proper cost records to substantiate claims, directing the assessee to provide necessary evidence to the AO for reevaluation. This summary provides a detailed analysis of the judgment, covering all the issues involved comprehensively.
|
