TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w of the similarity of facts, in the instant case also, we hereby affirm the order of the CIT(A), which is in line with the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. (supra). - Decided against revenue - ITA NO. 4024/MUM/2016 - - - Dated:- 30-1-2018 - SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri R.P. Meena For the Respondent : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, AM : The captioned appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-47, Mumbai dated 14.03.2016, pertaining to the Assessment Year 2009-10, which in turn has arisen from the order passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lier too on 10.08.2006 and even during the course of that search, the same Ms. Chaula Joshi had admitted to the fact that the group executed sales deed by accepting on money in cash which was over and above the agreement price. 3. At the time of hearing, the learned representative for the respondent-assessee made a preliminary point which was to the effect that a similar point has been decided by the Tribunal in the case of the assessee itself for Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 vide order in ITA Nos. 3162 3163/Mum/2016 dated 02.05.2017. In this context, to demonstrate the similarity of the facts and circumstances in the instant year, the respective orders of the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A), as also the Grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the business of real estate development and is a part of Rohan group of cases wherein a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 26.05.2011. Consequent to such search, assessment for Assessment Year 2009-10 has been completed by the Assessing Officer u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act dated 29.03.2014 wherein an addition of ₹ 2,70,60,000/- has been made primarily on account of unaccounted receipt of sale proceeds. As per the Revenue, assessee was in receipt of on-money on sale of flats/properties which was not disclosed and, therefore, the same was assessable as unaccounted on-money received on sales. The CIT(A), firstly, noted that on the date of search, i.e. 26.05.2011, the assessment for originally filed retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assistant/Liaison Officer). On perusal of the seized paper at Page 114 it is seen that there is no mention of the appellant company or the project undertaken by it on the said page and that the projects listed on it are namely Siddhesh Darshan; Mayuresh Apartments; Lifescapes Kshitij; Siddhesh Jyoti. In the submissions made in appeal, it is stated that these projects are undertaken by the following entities : Sr. Name of Project Entity of Rohan Group 1. Siddhesh Darshan Meridian Construction Private Limited 2. Mayuresh Apartment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l found in the course of search. On similar facts, our co-ordinate Bench, vide its order dated 02.05.2017 (supra), has observed as follows :- 5. We have perused the available material. We find that the FAA has given a categorical finding of fact that no incriminating material was found during the search and seizure operation that could justify the addition made by the AO. She has analysed the page number 114 that was seized by the authorised party carrying out the search proceedings. It is very clear that neither the name of the assessee nor the name of the project is appearing in the paper. The assessee had objected before the AO that the statements of the employees were not given to it. We do not know as to whether same were mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
