ACIT, Jaipur V. UNIQUE BUILDIERS & DEVELOPERS (AJAY), Jaipur

ITA 943/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2177 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 28-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VARINDER MEHTA
• Assessee Lawyers: P C PARWAL CA DHK
• Keywords: Rejection of books of accounts; Document seized
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 943/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S UNIQUE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (AJAY), 8 TH FLOOR, MILE STONE, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AACFU 0541 N VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI VARINDER MEHTA (CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL(CA) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 11.04.2017. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17/04/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-4, JAIPUR, DATED 19.08.2016 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2013-14 . THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITI ON OF RS. 5,87,79,840/- MADE BY THE AO BY APPLYING OF SECTION 145(3) WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINING QUANTATIVE AND QUALITATIVE STOCK REGISTER AND THE DOCUMENT SEIZED FROM SHRI NA VIN BHUTANI (A-2/51) AND FROM SHRI VIBHISHEK SINGH (PARTNER) A- 2/19 INDICATED ON MONEY RECEIVED. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING APPLICATI ON OF PERCENTAGE COMPLETION METHOD BY THE AO, WHEN THIS REJECTION ME ANS ACCEPTANCE OF NIL RETURN OF THE ASSESEE ENGAGED IN CONSTRUCTION AND SALE OF RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL PROJECTS. 2 ITA NO. 943/JP/2016 M/S UNIQUE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (AJAY). 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN RELYING UPON THE DE CISION OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR AY 2008-09 & 2009-1 0, THOUGH THESE ORDERS HAVE BEEN APPEALED AGAINST BEFORE HON BLE HIGH COURT BY THE DEPARTMENT ON PERVERSITY OF FACTS. 4. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IGNORING THAT THE ITAT ORDER ON WHICH THE CIT(A) HAS RELIED UPON, STATED A WRONG FA CT THAT THE TWO BROTHERS HAD SEPARATED IN 2006 AND THAT THE DOC UMENT (A- 2/51) WAS SEIZED FROM THE LAPTOP OF AN EMPLOYEE OF THE SEPARATED AJIT PAL GROUP, IGNORING THE FACT THAT TH E TWO BROTHERS- SHRI AJAY PAL SINGH AND SHRI AJIT PAL SI NGH WERE ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN BUSINESS TOGETHER AS PARTNERS T HEMSELVES OR THOUGH THEIR FAMILIES IN VARIOUS SISTER CONCERNS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND THE SEIZED DOCUMENT MENTIONED THE PROJECTS OF THE FIRM LIKE ROYAL PARADISE. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES ITS RIGHTS TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING. 2. BRIEFLY, STATED THE FACTS ARE THAT, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS FRAMED VIDE ORDER DATED 28/3/2016. WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND COMPUTED THE NET PROFIT ON THE BASIS OF PERCENT AGE COMPLETION METHOD AT RS. 5,87,79,837/-. AGAINST THIS THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), WHO AFTER FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASS ESSEES OWN CASE PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AND 2009-10 IN ITA NO. 589 & 590/JP/2012 AND ITA NO. 618 & 619/JP/2012, DELETED THE ADDITION. NOW, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF CO-ORD INATE RENDERED IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 AND 2012-13. THE LD. CIT (DR) CONCEDED THE FACTS, THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED AGAIN ST THE REVENUE BY THE DECISION OF 3 ITA NO. 943/JP/2016 M/S UNIQUE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (AJAY). THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS HONBLE TRIBUNAL IN A SSESSEES OWN CASE PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 AND 2012-13. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW . WE FIND THAT IN ITA NO. 531/JP/2014, GROUND NO. 1 WAS IDENTICAL AS GROUND N O. 1 OF THIS APPEAL. THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL IN PARA 5 HAS OBSEREVED THAT THE I DENTICAL ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST REVENUE IN ITA NO. 589 & 59 0/JP/2012. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PAR TIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE CO-ORDINATE BENC H HA CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE APPEALS MENTIONED AB OVE. THE C0-ORDINATE BENCH HAS PASSED THE SPEAKING ORDER IN THE APPEAL M ENTIONED ABOVE AND ALLOWED THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. BY R ESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CA SE, WE UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THIS FACT IS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE LD. DR. THERE FORE, TAKING A CONSISTENT VIEW, WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE INTO THE ORDER O F THE LD. CIT(A), SAME IS HEREBY AFFIRMED. THEREFORE, THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS AP PEAL ARE REJECTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 943/JP/2016 IS DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL 2017. SD/- SD/- ( HKKXPUN ( DQY HKKJR ) ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 17 /04/2017. POOJA/ 4 ITA NO. 943/JP/2016 M/S UNIQUE BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (AJAY). VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR. 2. THE RESPONDENT M/S UNIQUE BUILDERS & DEVELOPER S (AJAY), 8 TH FLOOR, MILE STONE, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 943/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR