9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1334X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2014-15. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and Partners in various Firms engaged in Construction and Land Development Activities. There was a search action on 13.06.2013 in the residential premises of the assessee wherein a small pocket diary seized as Annexure-AS-5 containing 50 pages wherein details of cash received/paid of the various residential and commercial housing projects. The assessee submitted that the payments are relating to M/s. Yash Buildcon, M/s. Yash Developers, M/s. Soham Builders and M/s. Soham Properties Developers relating to the various projects carried out by the above firms. 2.1. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee explained each and every e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Soham Builders on various occasions in the A.Y. 2014- 15. These were personal transactions of the assessee and did not pertain to the partners or to their firms. Further he worked out inflow of cash transactions of the credit side entries of the pocket diary to the tune of Rs. 2,53,04,000/- and added the same in the hands of the assessee. The AO concluded the findings with the observation that the contention of the assessee that all the transactions of on-money pertained to the firms and their partners and did not belong to himself in his personal capacity was not fully true as some of the transactions were related to the capital contributed by the assessee to Soham Builders in the capacity as a partner. 8.2 It was observed, after go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with their particulars on page 2, 3 and 4 of the assessment order and the same were reproduced again on page no. 5, 6 and 7 in order. It may be mentioned that the transactions mentioned on page No. 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 13 in the pocket diary there was no such narration about any capital contribution made by the assessee to the firm, Soham Builder as mentioned by the AO in the assessment order. The relevant entries in the debit side of the diary may be reproduced as below:- Page no 1 Given Cash To Bkg. At The Time Of Payment Received 196/21 Vastral 31/5 Vala Till Date Hisab Chukte Between Bkg And Arl Page no 3 En to SNa 20% (ArI) Page no 5 Given to Soham Builder 30 Na 20% (ArI) Page no 7 Given to Soham Builders 50 Na 40% Mujabh Hast ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irms and also that he was maintaining accounts of the partners of the firms was rejected without having any material evidence on the record. The AO did not disprove this fact either by carrying out cross verification with the partners of the firms or from the customers from whom the cash was received. The AO seems to be undecided about the entries in the pocket diary as to whether they pertained to the projects of the partnership firms or they were related only to the appellant. Therefore, after having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, the action of the AO was not sustainable. Accordingly, the ground of the appeal is allowed. 4. Aggrieved against the same, the Revenue is in appeal before us ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sclosed this unaccounted income in their respective Returns of Income and paid taxes thereon. Thus in the present assessee's case, the Ld. CIT(A) correct in deleting the sum of Rs. 2.53 crores in the hands of the assessee. The findings arrived by the Ld. CIT(A) does not require any interference and Revenue appeal is liable to be dismissed. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. The Ld. CIT(A) has already held that the Assessing Officer did not disprove that the entries in the diary seized are relating to the money transaction received for various housing projects of the Partnership Firms and the assessee was maintaining the accounts of the Partners of the various Firms. Further the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come of the appellant was assessed at Rs. 78,88,810/- for the year under consideration. From the above, it is evident that while the AO has correctly held that penalty u/s 271AAB is to be levied in the appellant's case, it is also a fact that the amount of Rs. 78,88,810/- on which the penalty has been levied by the AO includes not only the disclosed income, but also the regular income of the appellant. In my view, the penalty is to be levied @ 10% on the disclosed income which for the year under consideration was Rs. 2,94,50,649/-. Therefore, the AO is directed to recompute the amount of penalty to be levied u/s 271AAB accordingly." 8. Thus we do not find any merits in the ground raised by the Revenue and do not find any infirmity in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
