Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: VAT Audit :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: TDS :: form 3cd :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: due date for vat payment :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: VAT RATES :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: cpt :: empanelment :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: articles on VAT and GST in India
 
 
From the Courts »
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21
 CHAUDHARY SKIN TRADING COMPANY Vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-21
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 Deputy Director Of Income Tax Vs. Virage Logic International
 Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 International Taxation Vs. Virage Logic International India
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-06 Vs. Moderate Leasing And Capital Services Pvt. Ltd.
 ITO vs. Vikram A. Pradhan (ITAT Mumbai)

ITO W ard-2(4),Room no.381,3 r d Floor,CR Building,IP Estate,New Delhi V/s . Bhargava Promoters Pvt.Ltd., 7, Gurdwara Market,Old Seema Puri New Delhi
June, 22nd 2012
       IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI `A' BENCH
          BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, JM & SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, AM

                                   ITA no.5731/Del/2011
                                Assessment year:2006-07

ITO W ard-2(4),Room no.                   V/s .       Bhargava Promoters Pvt.
381,3 r d Floor,CR                                    Ltd., 7, Gurdwara Market,
Building,IP Estate,                                   Old Seema Puri New Delhi
New Delhi
                               [PAN : AACCB4755C]

(Appellant)                                                (Respondent)

                  Assessee by          Shri Venkatesh Mohan,AR
                  Revenue by           Shri Alok Singh,DR


                   Date of hearing                   20-06-2012
                   Date of pronouncement             20-06-2012





                                       ORDER


 A.N.Pahuja:- This appeal filed on 22.12.2011 by the Revenue against an order
 dated 15.10.2011 of the learned CIT(A)-V, New Delhi, raises the following
 grounds:-


                  1. "The Ld. CIT(A)has erred on facts and in law in deleting
                     addition of ` 74,02,500/-made on account unexplained
                     advances.

             2.      The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting
                     addition of `14,77,000/- made on account of unverified
                     advances in the name of Sh. Vikash Rao Vadi and Sh.
                     Anup Prasad.

                  3. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to
                     amend, modify, after, add or forego any ground(s) of
                     appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this
                     appeal. "
                                           2                   ITA no.5731/Del./2011


2.            Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring
income of `.7,04,756/- filed on 29th Nov, 2006 by the assessee, engaged in the
business of construction and renovation of buildings, was selected for scrutiny
with the service of a notice issued u/s143(2) of the Income-tax Act 1961,
(hereinafter referred to as the `Act']. During the course of assessment
proceedings, the Assessing Officer[AO in short] noticed that the assessee
reflected advances of `1,49,39,250/- against property. To a query by the A.O,
seeking evidence in support of these advances, the assessee did not furnish any
agreement with the parties from whom these advances were received .After
obtaining addresses of the parties, the AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to
30 parties, of which 20 notices were returned unserved. Out of the remaining 10
parties, only 7 replied. In the light of   various replies, the AO showcaused the
assessee as to why amount of advances be not added u/s 68 of the Act. In
response, the assessee replied that agreements had been executed with most
of the parties ,who replied in response to notice u/s 133(6) of the Act while for the
remaining parties, money had been refunded. However, the assessee did not
furnish any documentary evidence in support of these assertions while observing
that Shri Vikash Rao Vedi purchased property from the assessee for
consideration of `.6,50,000/- and advance of `.50,000/- was received while sale
deed had already been executed in the Financial Year 2005-06 and the
assessee reflected advance of `9 lacs without any basis. Apparently, the
assessee did not reflect correct amount of advance. Likewise, in respect of Shri
Anup Prasad, advance of `. 65,000/- was received and remaining amount of
`.9,35,000/- was received at the time of final sale on 25th Feb. 2006.However, the
assessee reflected advance ` Rs.2,50,000/- and `3,92,000/-, for which no
explanation was given. In view of the aforesaid facts, the A.O. added an amount
of `.88,79,500/- on account of unexplained advances , as detailed hereunder:
                                                      [In `]
       Total Amount of Advance shown.            1,49,39,250/-
       Less Confirmations received                 48,69,750/-
       Less Sale deed filed by assessee            26,67,000/-
                                                  3                          ITA no.5731/Del./2011


      Balance Amount                                         74,02,500/-
      Add
      Advance in the name of
      Sh. Vikas Rao Vadi
      and Sh Anup Prasad                                   14,77,000/-
      Total Amount remaining unexplained                                     88,79,500/-





2.    On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) appeal, after having a remand report from the
AO on the additional evidence submitted by the assessee and comments of the
assessee thereon, concluded as under:
      "4.3    I have carefully considered the assessment order as well as
      the written submission of the appellant as well as the remand
      report. It appears from record that the appellant did not have
      sufficient time to collect the necessary evidences, hence the
      additional evidences filed during appeal proceedings are being
      admitted. With regard to the addition of Rs.74,02,500/- on account
      of unverified purchases, the A.O. has in the remand report
      submitted as under;

      "During remand proceedings notices u/s 133(6) issued to parties from
      whom the assessee co has taken Advances amounting to Rs.74,02,500/-
      The reply of these parties received. The complete ITR particulars of these
      parties are also received alongwith replies. The Assessee co has provided
      with complete books of accounts alongwith bills and vouchers. The
      advances/transactions shown by the assessee co frm various parties are
      duly reflected in his books of accounts. Therefore these seems to be
      genuine"
              In the light of these findings by the A.O. in the remand report
      after enquiries and verification of books of accounts, the addition of
      unexsplained advances of Rs.74,02,500/- are being deleted.

      ........................................................................................."
      5.2      I have carefully considered the facts of the case,
      submissions of the appellant, documents placed on record, the
      findings of the assessing officer remand, report given by assessing
      officer and the rejoinder filed by the appellant. The A.O. has
      submitted in the remand report in connection withs these advances
      as under;
                                           4                      ITA no.5731/Del./2011


        "That the advances in the name of Sh. Vikash Vadi and Anup Prasad is
        also examined and the transaction is duly reflected in the books of
        accounts of the assessee co."

        In the light of the report given by the A.O. after verification of books
        of accounts and after consideration of the explanation and
        evidences furnished in support of the same, the addition on this
        account is directed to be deleted.

4.             The Revenue is now is in appeal before us against the aforesaid
finding of the ld. CIT(A) .The Ld. DR supported the order of the A.O. while the ld.
AR at on behalf of the assessee relied upon the findings in the impugned order..


5.             We have heard both the parties and gone through the facts of the
case. After examining the details furnished by the assessee during the remand
proceedings, the A.O. concluded that all the aforesaid advances/transactions
were reflected by the assessee in their books of accounts and were genuine. In
these circumstances, especially when the Revenue did not place before us any
material, controverting the aforesaid findings of facts recorded by the ld. CIT(A)
so as to enable us to take a different view in the matter, we have no basis to
interfere. In view thereof, ground nos. 1 & 2 in the appeal are dismissed.


6.      No additional ground having been raised before us in terms of residuary
ground no. 3 in the appeal, accordingly, this ground is dismissed.


7. No other plea or argument was raised before us.


8. In the result, appeal is dismissed
             Order pronounced in the open court immediately after the
                         conclusion of the hearing on 20.6.2012


             Sd/-                                             Sd/-
       (U.B.S. BEDI)                                   (A.N. PAHUJA)
     (Judicial Member)                               (Accountant Member)
                                     5    ITA no.5731/Del./2011


Copy of the Order forwarded to:-

1.   Assessee
2.   ITO W ard-2(4),New Delhi
3.   CIT concerned
4.   CIT(Appeals)-V, New Delhi.
5.   DR, ITAT,'A' Bench, New Delhi
6.   Guard File.
                                             By Order,

                                         Deputy/Asstt.Registrar
                                            ITAT, Delhi
 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Achievements

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions