AI Insights
The case involves an appeal by the Department against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana, which pertained to the Assessment Year 2019-20. The Department challenged the deletion of several additions made by the Assessing Officer (A.O) regarding unaccounted sales and investments based on extrapolation from seized documents. The main contention was whether the extrapolation used by the A.O. was justified and whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting these additions. The tribunal referenced its earlier decisions for the Assessment Year 2021-22, where similar issues were resolved, leading to the dismissal of the Department's appeal.
Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 774843 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
CRN Number
Duration Of Justice
6 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
03-09-2025
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
A
Assessment Year
2019-2020
Appeal Filed On
06-02-2025
Judgement Text
"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “ए” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE ŵी राजपाल यादव, उपाȯƗ एवं ŵी क ृणवȶ सहाय, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV, VP & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 190/Chd/ 2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Years : 2019-20 The Dy. CIT Central Circle-1 Ludhiana बनाम Homelife Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Sunview Enclave, Ayali Kalan, Ludhiana, Punjab-142027 ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCH5690M अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05/08/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03/09/2025 आदेश/Order PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Department against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana dt. 29/11/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. In the present appeal following grounds have been raised by the Department: 1. \"Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.34, 28, 91, 060/- made by the A.O on account of unaccounted sale of residential plots on the basis of logical & rational extrapolation based on evidences and incriminating materials seized from various premises during the search? 2. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has tailed to appreciate the facts of the case as well as seized documents in respect of Plot No.286 & 287 which can establish that the assessee company has sold residential plots @ Rs.61, 000/- per Sq, yard which is more than Printed from counselvise.com 2 the disclosed price and the said documents have also been accepted by CIT(A) during A.Y. 2021-22 but the extrapolation calculated on such documents in the previous years has not been considered by CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana? 3. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in relying on its own order for A.Y. 2021-22 wherein Ld. CIT(A) relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of V.M. Spinning ills reported in (2011) 16 taxmann.com 199 to deny the benefit of extrapolation as facts of the case of assessee differ from the referred case and AO has relied on the additional evidence and investigation to come to conclusion that the assessee is indulging in large scale undervaluation and hence extrapolation is required? 4. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 52, 83, 500/- made by the A. O on account of unaccounted sale of SCOs on the basis of logical & rational extrapolation based on evidences. 5. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 9, 87, 62, 864/-made by the A.O on account of unexplained investment made for the purchase of agriculture lands from M/s Trimurti Homes Private Limited on the basis of seized documents pertains to other assessment year? 6. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has failed to appreciate the facts of the case as well as seized documents of Sh. Gurmeet Singh C/o Ajay Prabhakar which establish that the rate of the agriculture lands is much higher than their registered sale value? 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, vary, omit or substitute any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of appeal.\" 3. The facts in brief, are that the assessee is into the real estate business and there was search and seizure operations u/s 132 conducted on the assessee on 16.11.2021. The assessment was framed u/s 147 as per amended provisions and at the outset, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee brought to our notice that the ground of appeal as taken by the Department are identical to the appeal Printed from counselvise.com 3 of the assessee and Department for Asstt. Year 2021-22, the matter has come up before us in ITA No. 880/Chd/2020(A). The appeal of the Department in ITA No. 1036/Chd/2024 was dismissed, the order was pronounced on 17.07.2025, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. 4. Briefly, the issue is on account of the extrapolation of the sale rate of the residential plots and receipt of on money. For it on the basis of certain enhanced valuation as made by the plot holders for submitting it to the Bank for advances for construction of house. Plots were sold by the assessee during the year under consideration, the enhanced rate was applied by the AO and that was deleted by the CIT(A), as there was no incriminating evidence found during the year under consideration. Similarly, certain unaccounted income on account of sale of SCO was made by the AO during the year under consideration for 4 SCOs and on that basis addition was made. Valuation was got done by the buyers of the SCO, for raising loan from the financial Institutions at enhanced rate. That basis was taken as the rate at which, the SCO could have been sold and, accordingly, the addition was made. Similarly, during the year under consideration, certain agricultural land was purchased by the assessee from M/s Trimurti Homes Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer by relying upon certain evidence for purchase of agricultural land in the case of one Sh. Gurmeet Singh for Asstt. Year 2021-22 had extrapolated the rate of the purchase of agricultural land in Asstt. Year 2021-22 and the AO during the year under consideration applied the same rate, which was adopted in Asstt. Year 2021-22. Printed from counselvise.com 4 5. The Ld.CIT (A) while deleting the addition followed his own order for Asstt. Year 2021-22 as per his finding at pages 31 to 35 of the order, deleted the entire addition. In the order. The Department has filed appeal raising identical grounds of appeal as they were taken in Asstt. Year 2021-22. The appellant had filed a chart before us that how each and every ground is covered by the order of Hon'ble ITAT for Asstt. Year 2021-22 in ITA No. 880/Chd/2024 (A) and in ITA No. 1036/Chd/2024 (D). Issue involved Relevant ground No. of departmental appeal before ITAT Amount of addition made by the AO. Amount of addition deleted by the Ld.CIT(A) Relevant page No. of CIT(A) order Relevant page of decision taken by the Hon'ble ITAT for AY 2021-22 in ITA No. 880/Chd/2024(A) and ITA No. 1036/Chd/2024(D) Unaccounted sale of residential plots and receipts of on money 1-3 34,28,91,060 34,28,91,060 21-32 Page 26-32 Para 36-39 Unaccounted sale of SCOs 4 52,83,500 52,83,500 32-35 Page 36 Para 46-47 Unexplained investment made for purchase of agricultural land from M/s Trimurti Homes Pvt. Ltd. on the basis of third party evidence 5-6 9,87,62,864 9,87,62,864 35 Page 37-40 . Para 48-51 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of AO. 7. We have gone through the above submissions and also the earlier order of this Bench in ITA No. 880/Chd/2024(A) and in ITA No. 1036/Chd/2024 (D). We find that all the issues are identical and the finding of the Hon'ble Bench have been recorded from Printed from counselvise.com 5 para 59 onwards for Asstt. Year 2021-22. Following our earlier order for Asstt. Year 2021-22 as cited supra, we have no hesitation in dismissing this appeal of the Department. 8. In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/09/2025 Sd/- Sd/- राजपाल यादव क ृणवȶ सहाय (RAJPAL YADAV) (KRINWANT SAHAY) उपाȯƗ/VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "
Other Referred Cases
V.M. Spinning Mills vs. CIT
Laws Referred To
Income Tax Act
Tax Holiday Secrets for Startups
₹0
1:1 Consultation on Tax Litigation
₹1
1:1 Consultation on FEMA Compliance
₹1
Letter of Indemnity - Registering as Representative Assessee for Deceased
Mehul₹0
Contractor Indemnity Agreement
₹0
Residency Rules: Income Tax Act, 1961 vs Income Tax Bill, 2025 — A Subtle Yet Significant Shift!
Team Counselvise - February 18, 2026
Finance Bill, 2026: Key Direct Tax Amendments on Assessments and Appeals
Team Counselvise - February 06, 2026
Finance Bill, 2026: Key GST Reforms that will Reshape Compliance and Cash Flows
Team Counselvise - February 03, 2026