D.C.I.T.,Circle-6(1), Kolkata V. M/S. Dhoot Developers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 365/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6776 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANU BISWAS
• Assessee Lawyers: MANOJ KATARUKA
• Keywords: Capital asset
• Section: 143(3); 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B, BENC H KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM ./ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16) DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA VS. M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. 5, JBS HALDEN AVENUE, ROOM NO. S2, 2 ND FLOOR, SILVER ARCADE, WEST BENGAL-700105 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. :AABCD 5433 A (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :SMT. RANU BISWAS, ADDL. CIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANOJKATARUKA, ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 05/12/2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07/02/2020 / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, PERTA INING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL)-2, KOLKATA, IN APPEAL NO. 10472/CIT(A)-2/2 017-18, WHICH IN TURN ARISES OUT OF AN ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 29/ 12/2017. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS FOLLOWS: M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2015-16 2 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,47,69,164/- M ADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME ON SALE OF FLATS. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A MERE CONFIRM ING PARTY IN THE SALE DEEDS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESS EE ITSELF ACCEPTED THAT IT RECEIVED SALE CONSIDERATIONS AND SHOWED THE SAME AS ADVANCE RECEIVED IN ITS BALANCE SHEET, SCHEDULE 3.06. 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN ACCEPTING CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE LIABILITY OF ADVANCE AS SHOWN IN SCHEDULE 3.06 OF BALANCE SHEET IS MUCH LESSER THAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED AS ADVAN CE AS REPORTED BY ASSESSEE IN LETTER DATED 19.12.2017. 4. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY OFFERE D PROFIT FROM SALE OF THE RELEVANT PROPERTY IN WEST BENGAL IN THE FY 2006-07 WHEREAS THE PROPERTY REPORTED IN AIR IS REGISTERED BY JT. SUB REGISTER K URLA, MUMBAI AS REFLECTED IN AIR INFORMATION. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES FOR LEAVE TO ADD, DELE TE OR MODIFY ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. BRIEF FACTS QUA THE ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SELLING OF FLATS AFTER CONSTRUCTION. DURING THE COURSE OF A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS OBSERVED BY ASSESSING OFFICER FROM THE RETURN OF INCOME FILE D BY ASSESSEE ON 30.09.2015 IN SCHEDULEOF PROFIT& LOSS ACCOUNT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD FLATS AMOUNTING TO RS 1,87,93,862/-.HOWEVER, FROM THE AIR INFORMATION, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD THE 11 NUMBER OF PROPERTIES DURING THE CONCERN ED YEAR AND THE SALE VALUE AS PER INFORMATION AMOUNTS TO RS 7,35,63,026/-. THE SAME I S ALSO REFLECTED FROM THE REGISTERED SALE DEEDS, THE COPIES OF WHICH ARE SUBMITTED BY TH E ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE TWO FIGURES VID E E-MAIL DATED 22.12.2017. A REPLY OF THE SAID E-MAIL WAS RECEIVED ON 27.12.2017, WHER EIN IT WAS STATED THAT IN SOME CASES THEFLATS WERE SOLD, THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM THE CU STOMER IS SHOWN AS ADVANCE RECEIPT FROM CUSTOMER UNDER THE HEAD OTHER CURRENT LIABILI TIES IN THE BALANCE SHEET. M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2015-16 3 4. HOWEVER, ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CONTENTI ON OF THE ASSESSEE AND HELD THAT THE REVENUE IS TO BE RECOGNIZED BY THEASSESSEE AS AND W HEN THE SALE WAS MADE. ALL THE ABOVE REFERRED PROPERTIES MENTIONED IN AIR INFORMATION WE RE SOLD AND EVEN REGISTERED ON VARIOUS DATES WHICH ARE WITHIN THE CONCERNED FINANC IAL YEAR. REGISTRATION OF THE DEED OF CONVEYANCE WAS DONE DURING THE YEAR AS A FULL A ND FINAL SETTLEMENT OF TRANSACTIONS IN RESPECT OF SALE OF THE FLATS. THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE I.T. ACT,1961 THAT EVEN AFTER SELLING OF PRODUCT, THE SALE PROCEEDS MAY BE TAKEN AS ADVANCE RATHER THAN SALE. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, RS 5,47,69,164/-,(RS 735,63,026/- LE SS RS 1,87,93,862/-), BEING THE DIFFERENCE OF SALE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR AND WHAT WAS OFFERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE IS ADDED BACK TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF T HE ASSESSEE. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE RE VENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GON E THROUGH THE SUBMISSION PUT FORTH ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE DOCU MENTS FURNISHED AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON, AND PERUSED THE FACT OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE FINDINGS OF THE LD CIT(A) AND OTHER MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE NOTE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,47,69,164/- HAS NOTED THAT AS PER AIR INFORMATION ASSESSEE HAS SOLD 11 NUMBER OF PROPERTI ES / FLATS DURING THE YEAR, THE SALE VALUE OF WHICH WAS RS. 7,35,63,026/-. THE ASSE SSING OFFICER ALSO NOTED THAT THE SALE WAS REFLECTED AS PER THE REGISTERED SALE D EED, COPIES OF WHICH WERE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AIR INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE, FROM WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBTAINED INFORMATI ON, IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION AS REPRODUCED HEREIN CONSIDERATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE ABOVE MENTIONED RS.7,35,63,026/- AND AS BECAUSE SALE HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN THE ASSES SEES BOOK TO M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ASSESSMENT YEAR: 4 AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION AS REPRODUCED HEREIN ABOVE THE A.O. HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE ABOVE MENTIONED AND AS BECAUSE SALE HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN THE ASSES SEES BOOK TO M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 ABOVE THE A.O. HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE ABOVE MENTIONED FLATS FOR AND AS BECAUSE SALE HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN THE ASSES SEES BOOK TO M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2015-16 5 THE EXTENT OF RS. 1,87,93,862/- THE DIFFERENCE OF R S.5,47,69,164/- (7,35,63,026 - 1,87,93,862) HAS BEEN ADDED BACK AS UNDISCLOSED SAL ES. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESS EE COMPANY WAS THE OWNER OF APPROXIMATELY 232 COTTAHS OF LAND AT R.S DAG NO. 32 1 /615 IN MOUZA KOCHPUKUR. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD ENTERED INTO A JOINT DEVEL OPMENT AGREEMENT VIDE AGREEMENT DATED 4 LH DAY OF AUGUST 2004 WITH M/S. SANJEEVANI PROJECTS P VT. LTD AND ITS ASSOCIATES. AS PER CLAUSE 3 OF THE AGREEMEN T, M/S. SANJEEVANI PROJECTS PVT. LTD. HAD AN OPTION TO BUY OUT OF THE SAID LAND ON M UTUALLY AGREED TERMS. IN EXERCISE OF THE OPTION UNDER CLAUSE 3 OF THE JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH M/S. SANJEEVANI PROJECTS PVT. L TD. VIDE LETTER DATED 18 TH JANUARY, 2007 MUTUALLY AGREED FOR SALE OF THE LAND AT A TOTAL LUMP SUM CONSIDERATION OF RS. 9,00,00,000/-. THE ASSESSEE BO OKED PROFIT ON SALE OF THE ABOVE REFERRED LAND IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 R ELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 FOR RS.4,25,08,408/-. THE ASSESSEE HAD DURI NG THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FILED AUDITED ACCOUNTS AS WELL AS THE A SSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED FOR A.Y. 2007- 08 ALONG WITH SUBMISSIONS FILED ON 21 -1 2 -2017 WHEREIN PROFIT FROM SALE OF LAND WAS BOOKED. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONS IDERATION THE DEVELOPERS ALONG WITH OTHERS HAD AFTER DEVELOPING OF THE PROPE RTY ENTERED INTO 11 SALE AGREEMENTS WITH PROSPECTIVE BUYERS AND DUE TO THE R EASON THAT THE AGREEMENT FOR TRANSFER OF LAND MADE BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE DEVELOPERS WAS NOT REGISTERED AND THE ASSESSEE WAS MADE AS CONFIRMING PARTY IN EA CH OF THE CONVEYANCE ENTERED INTO BY THE DEVELOPERS WITH THE PROSPECTIVE BUYERS. THE INDENTURE OF CONVEYANCE MADE BETWEEN THE DEVELOPERS AND THE PROSPECTIVE BUY ERS CLEARLY STATES THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS THE CONFIRMING PARTY AND NO FUR THER CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. AS PER THE AIR DA TA ALSO THE JOINT PARTY DETAILS OF THE FLATS SOLD HAVE BEEN MENTIONED AND AS BECAUS E THE ASSESSEE WAS THE CONFIRMING PARTY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD TO ALSO A FFIX SIGNATURE BEFORE THE REGISTRAR OF ASSURANCES. ALL THE INDENTURES OF CONV EYANCE MADE WITH THE 11 PARTIES WERE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DUR ING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2015-16 6 PROCEEDINGS AND THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS ONLY A CON FIRMING PARTY AND NO CONSIDERATION WAS EVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COM PANY WAS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE CONVEYANCE DEEDS. THE A.O. THEREFORE HAS ERR ONEOUSLY HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THESE FLATS FOR A TOTAL CONSIDERA TION OF RS.7,35,63,026/- AND ERRONEOUSLY HELD THAT IT HAS NOT BOOKED SALES TO TH E EXTENT OF RS. RS.5,47,69,164/- (7,35,63,026 1,87,93,862). THE AIR DATA ONLY GIVE S AO THE GUIDING FACTOR TO VERIFY AND MAKE ENQUIRIES AND TAX CORRECT INCOME. A S THE ASSESSEE WAS A CONFIRMING PARTY TO THE CONVEYANCE DEED ITS NAME WA S REFLECTED IN THE AIR DATA BUT THE AO SHOULD HAVE EXAMINED IT. IT WAS CLEARLY EXPLAINED TO THE A.O. THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY SOLD THEIR RIGHTS IN THE LAND IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 200607AND HAD BOOKED THE PROFIT IN THAT YEAR ITSELF AND ONLY BECAUSE THE AGREEMENT WAS NOT REGISTERED THEREFORE AT THE TIME OF CONVEYANCE TO T HE INDIVIDUAL PURCHASERS BY THE DEVELOPERS THE ASSESSEE HAD TO BECOME A CONFIRMING PARTY.IT IS NOT OUT OF PLACE TO MENTION HERE THAT THE PROFIT ON SALE BOOKED IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT OF RS. 1,87,93,862/- WAS IN RESPECT OF PROFIT ON SALE OF D HOOT BUSINESS CENTRE AND ALSO LAND AT KALIKAPUR. THEREFORE, ADDITION OF UNDISCLOS ED SALES OF RS. 5,47,69,164/- (7,35,63,026 1,87,93,862) MADE BY ASSESSING OFFIC ER IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 8. WE NOTE THAT LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION OBS ERVING THE FOLLOWING: I HAVE CONSIDERED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, STATEMENT OF FACTS AND SUBMISSION OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLATE COMP ANY AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED IN THE LIGHT OF THE MA TERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD E-F ILED RETURN ON 30.09.2015 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.17,33,690/-. THE RETUR N WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND NOTICES WERE ISSUED U/S 143(2) AND 1 42(1) AGAINST WHICH FULL COMPLIANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED U/S 143(3) VIDE ORDER DATED 29.12.2017 ON A TOTAL INCOME OF RS .5,65,02,854/- BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS.5,47,69,164/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLO SED INCOME ON SALE OF FLATS. THE A.O. WHILE MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.5,47,69,16 4/- HAS NOTED THAT AS PER AIR INFORMATION ASSESSEE HAS SOLD 11 NUMBER OF PROPERTI ES/FLATS DURING THE YEAR, THE SALE VALUE OF WHICH WAS RS.7,35,63.026/-. THE A.O. ALSO NOTED THAT THE SALE WAS REFLECTED AS PER THE REGISTERED SALE DEED, COPIES O F WHICH WERE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION AS REPRODUCED HEREIN ABOVE THE A.O. HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE ABOVE MENTIONED FLATS FOR M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2015-16 7 RS.7,35,63,026/- AND AS BECAUSE SALE HAS BEEN REFLE CTED IN THE ASSESSEES BOOK TO THE EXTENT OF RS.L,87,93,862/- THE DIFFERENCE OF RS .5,47,69,164/- HAS BEEN ADDED BACK AS UNDISCLOSED SALES. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS THE OWNER OF APPROXIMATELY 232 COTTAHS OF LAND AT R.S. DAG NO. 3 21/615 IN MOUZA KOCHPUKUR. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD ENTERED INTO A JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT VIDE AGREEMENT DATED 4 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2004 WITH M/S. SANJEEVANI PROJECTS PVT. LTD AND ITS ASSOCIATES. AS PER CLAUSE 3 OF THE AGREEMENT M/S. SANJEEVANI PROJECTS PVT. LTD. HAD AN OPTION TO BUY OUT THE SAID LAND ON MUTUALLY AGREED TERMS. IN EXERCISE OF THE OPTION UNDER CLAUS E 3 OF THE JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH M/S. SANJEEVANI P ROJECTS PVT. LTD. VIDE LETTER DATED 18.01.2007 MUTUALLY AGREED FOR SALE OF THE LA ND AT A TOTAL LUMP SUM CONSIDERATION OF RS. 9,00,00,000/. THE ASSESSEE BOO KED PROFIT ON SALE OF THE ABOVE REFERRED LAND IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006- 07 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 FOR RS.4,25,08,408/-. THE ASSESSEE HAD DURI NG THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FILED AUDITED ACCOUNTS AS WELL AS THE A SSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED FOR A.Y. 2007-08 ALONG WITH SUBMISSIONS FILED ON 21.12. 2017 WHEREIN PROFIT FROM SALE OF LAND WAS BOOKED. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE DEVELOPERS ALONG WITH OTHERS HAD AFTER DEVELOPING OF THE PROPERTY ENTERED INTO 11 SALE AGR EEMENTS WITH PROSPECTIVE BUYERS AND DUE TO THEREASON THAT THE AGREEMENT FOR TRANSFER OF LAND MADE BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE DEVELOPERS WAS NOT REG ISTERED THE ASSESSEE WAS MADE AS CONFIRMING PARTY IN EACH OF THE CONVEYANCE ENTERED INTO BY THE DEVELOPERS WITH THE PROSPECTIVE BUYERS. THE INDENTU RE OF CONVEYANCE MADE BETWEEN THE DEVELOPERS AND THE PROSPECTIVE BUYERS CLEARLY S TATES THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS THE CONFIRMING PARTY AND NO FURTHER CONSIDERATION HAS B EEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. AS PER THE AIR DATA ALSO THE JOINT PARTY DETAILS OF THE FLATS SOLD HAVE BEEN MENTIONED AND AS BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE AS THE CONFIR MING PARTY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD TO ALSO AFFIX SIGNATURE BEFORE THE REGI STRAR OF ASSURANCES. ALL THE INDENTURES OF CONVEYANCE MADE WITH THE 11 PARTIES W ERE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS AND THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS ONLY A CONFIRMING PARTY AND NO CONSIDER ATION WAS EVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE C ONVEYANCE DEEDS. THE A.O. THEREFORE HAS ERRONEOUSLY HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S SOLD THESE FLATS FOR A TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF RS 7,35,63,026/- AND ERRONEOUSLY H ELD THAT IT HAS NOT BOOKED SALES TO THE EXTENT OF RS. RS.5,47,69,164/-. THE AI R DATA IS NOT SACROSANCT AND ONLY GIVES AO THE GUIDING FACTOR TO VERIFY AND MAKE ENQUIRIES AND TAX CORRECT INCOME. AS THE ASSESSEE WAS A CONFIRMING PARTY TO T HE CONVEYANCE DEED ITS NAME WAS REFLECTED IN THE AIR DATA BUT THE AO SHOULD HAV E APPLIED MIND. IT WAS CLEARLY EXPLAINED TO THE A.O. THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY SOLD THEIR RIGHTS IN THE LAND IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006 - 07AND HAD BOO KED THE PROFIT IN THATYEAR ITSELF AND ONLY BECAUSE THE AGREEMENT WAS NOT REGIS TERED THEREFORE AT THE TIME OF CONVEYANCE TO THE INDIVIDUAL PURCHASERS BY THE DEVE LOPERS THE ASSESSEE HAD TO BECOME A CONFIRMING/ PARTY. M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.365/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2015-16 8 I AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSION OF THE A.R. OF THE APPE LLATE COMPANY THAT THE APPELLATE HAS ALREADY DISCLOSED THE SALE TRANSACTIO NS AND PAID TAX IN THE EARLIER YEARS AS MENTIONED SUPRA. HENCE, THE A.O. IS DIRECT ED TO DELETE THE ADDITION. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LD. CI T(A). THAT BEING SO, WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), HIS ORDERS, ON THIS ISSUE, IS HEREBY UPHELD AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY T HE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 07.02.2020 SD/- ( A.T. VARKEY ) SD/- (A.L.SAINI) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / DATE: 07/02/2020 ( SB, SR.PS ) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA 2. M/S DHOOT DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. 3. C.I.T(A)- 4. C.I.T.- KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATABENCHES, KOLKATA. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKA TA BENCHES