Online Updated Classes for CA CS CMA Subjects for Nov 21/May 22 Exams. Enroll Now!! Call: 088803-20003

ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

ACIT, New Delhi M/s JKG Construction (P) Ltd, New Delhi

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Delhi

Brief :
Aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23 (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of JKG constructions Pvt. Ltd (“the assessee”), for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12, deleting the additions, Revenue preferred these appeals. Since the facts out of which the issues requiring adjudication arise, are identical, we deem it just and proper to dispose these appeals by way of this common order.

Citation :
ITA 3394/DEL/2015

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH ‘B’ NEW DLEHI

BEFORE SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND

SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
 ITA Nos. 3394, 4176 & 4801/Del/2015
Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

ACIT, Central Circle -4, PAN : AABCJ1045L
(Appellant) 

vs. 

JKG Construction Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi. B-174, Yojna Vihar, Delhi
(Respondent)

 Appellant by : Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT/DR
 Respondent by: Sh. R.K. Sharma, Advocate

 Date of hearing: 08/04/2021
 Date of order : 10 /06/2021

ORDER

PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M.

Aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23 (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of JKG constructions Pvt. Ltd (“the assessee”), for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12, deleting the additions, Revenue preferred these appeals. Since the facts out of which the issues requiring adjudication arise, are identical, we deem it just and proper to dispose these appeals by way of this common order.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company and as the name indicates is involved in construction activities. Search and  seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) was carried out in the case of M/s JKG Constructions Pvt. Ltd belonging to the JKG group on 04/08/2011 and during such search certain documents were found. Such documents include a calculation sheet for booking flat by one Sh. Chaya Singh and Bhuwan Prakash Yadav signed by Chhaya and JK Goel showing the total cost of the flat as Rs. 48,83,625/-, dated 29/3/2011 for Rs. 31,30,750/-, a payment clearance dated 28/3/2011and a Kachi Parchi dated 12/02/2011 for receipt of a sum of Rs. 2.65 Lacs by Sanjay Singh in respect of such flat No. 802; and letter dated 30/7/2008 requesting allottee RK Gauba to pay Rs. 1,54,910/-spell that JKGCPL, mentioning the cost as Rs. 13,57,800/-and the agreement in respect of flat No. A-601. Flat number A-601 was sold to Pushpa Gauba at Rs. 23,37,650/-.

3. Basing on these documents learned Assessing Officer concluded that the group has been receiving money in excess of the disclosed sale consideration for the flats; that the real price of flat number A-802 was Rs. 48,83,625/-whereas the price of flat number A-601 was Rs. 30,57,800/-which shows that the disclosed consideration in respect of flat number A-802 was only 64% of the actual consideration whereas the same for flat number A-601 was 83% thereof. On this premise, learned Assessing Officer calculated the difference between the actual price according to him and the disclosed price in respect of all the sales that took place in the financial years 2008-09 to 2010-11 (corresponding to the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12) and made an addition of Rs.1,97,37,919/-, Rs. 5,35,32,673/-and Rs. 3, 94, 75, 181/-for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2011-12 respectively. 

To know more in details find the attachment file
 

 

Guest
on 16 June 2021
Published in Income Tax
Views : 25
downloaded 4 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags