9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal. 3. The issue raised in the present appeal vide ground No.1 is against the addition of Rs. 2,25,000/-. 4. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee was carrying on the business as promoter and builder of properties. The case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny. Subsequently, survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 01.03.2011 and the assessee admitted unaccounted income of Rs. 25,75,000/- for the year under appeal. The assessee in consequent thereto, furnished revised return of income on 31.03.2011 declaring total income of Rs. 57,10,260/-. The assessee in the revised return of income offered additional income of Rs. 23,50,000/- in place of Rs. 25,75,000/- as admitted during the course of survey. The assessee was asked to explain as to why against admission of accounted income of Rs. 25,75,000/- received in cash from the flat / row houses / Twin bungalow holders being parking, MSEB and other charges why a declaration was of Rs. 23,50,000/- was m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the partner who was looking after the business was recorded. Further, during the course of survey, documents were found in respect of the parking charges, etc. received by the assessee for assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12, against which additional income of Rs. 3,43,83,500/- was offered by the assessee. Out of said additional income, a sum of Rs. 25,75,000/- was declared as relatable to the year under appeal. Thereafter, a retraction statement was submitted by the assessee on 06.04.2011 under which, the declaration was revised to Rs. 2,78,83,500/- as against initial disclosure of Rs. 3,43,83,500/-. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee further pointed out that the revised return of income including the said additional income was filed. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee contended that no parking charges were received from the row houses and twin bungalow holders and consequently, the retraction was made. It was alleged by the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee that the said retraction statement was duly filed before the Assessing Officer as is evident from the stamp of 06.04.2011 available on the said letter and hence, the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e course of survey action, there was difference between the actual consideration received and the agreement value shown. It was further explained that the actual consideration was on the higher side than the consideration shown for agreement purpose. It was further stated that the entire difference was not received in cash and the same was nowhere reflected in the books of account and some of the payments were made by the customers for the purpose of registration and stamp duty which was not part of sale receipts. However, he agreed with the list which was enclosed as Annexure A to the statement showing unaccounted and undisclosed income received by the assessee firm over the years in the form of cash mainly on account of parking and MSEB charges received from various customers and made a declaration of Rs. 3.43 crores relating to assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12. For the captioned assessment year i.e. 2009-10 undisclosed and unaccounted income of Rs. 25,75,000/- was admitted during the course of survey by Shri Ajinkya Kalbhor. In reply to question No.10 when he was asked to say anything else on his own, he reiterated that on account of receipt of cash from customers towards car ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that parking charges were not received from twin bungalow holders and after verifying the impounded material, the said portion of Rs. 2,25,000/- was retracted and not offered for tax. 13. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee brought to our attention the retraction statement made by the assessee on 06.04.2011 which was filed before the concerned Assessing Officer. The copy of the said retraction statement along with Annexure is attached at pages 1 to 8 of the Paper Book. By the said retraction statement, the assessee claims that it had revised its disclosure of unaccounted and undisclosed income on account of parking and MSEB charges from Rs. 3,43,83,500/- to Rs. 2,78,83,500/-. In the said statement, the assessee claims that it had not received any parking and MSEB charges from row houses and twin bungalow holders. For the year under appeal, the assessee points out that the difference was only in respect of the TB No.14 sold to one Shri P.K. Patil wherein, in the original Annexure A prepared during the course of survey, the undisclosed income was taken at Rs. 3 lakhs whereas on reconciliation it transpires that in fact, the difference was Rs. 75,000/-. Consequent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
