The ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Arista Lifespace Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITSSA 87/AHD/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5142 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 04-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-06-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRIKAMLESHMAKWANA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIMEHULK.PATEL

Judgement Text

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण , अहमदाबादनयायपीी INTHEINCOMETAXAPPELLATETRIBUNAL, ‘’C’’BENCH,AHMEDABAD BEFOREMsSUCHITRAKAMBLE,JUDICIALMEMBER And SHRIWASEEMAHMED,ACCOUNTANTMEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./IT(SS)ANo.87/AHD/2019 धििाधरणवरध / Asstt.Year:2014-2015 I.T.O, Ward-1(1)(3), Ahmedabad. Vs. M/s.AristaLifespacePvt.Ltd., 01,ShriKrishnaCentre, 1 st Floor, NearMithakaliSixRoad, Ahmedabad. PAN:AAJCA0597Q (Applicant)(Respondent) Revenueby:ShriKamleshMakwana,CITDR Assesseeby:ShriMehulK.Patel,AR सुिवाईकीतारीख/DateofHearing:05/09/2023 घोरणाकीतारीख/DateofPronouncement:29/11/2023 आदेश/ORDER PERWASEEMAHMED,ACCOUNTANTMEMBER: ThecaptionedappealhasbeenfiledattheinstanceoftheRevenueagainst theorderoftheLearnedCommissionerofIncometax(Appeals)-11,Ahmedabad, arisinginthematterofassessmentorderpassedunders.153Cr.w.s.143(3)of theIncomeTaxAct,1961(here-in-afterreferredtoas"theAct")relevanttothe AssessmentYear2014-2015. IT(SS)Ano.87/AHD/2021 A.Y.2014-15 2 2.TheonlyissueraisedbytherevenueisthattheLd.CIT(A)erredindeleting theadditionmadebytheAOforRs.1,71,00,000/-u/s69AoftheActrepresenting themoneyreceiptagainstthesaleofflat. 3.Thenecessaryfactsarethattheassessee,aprivatelimitedcompany,is engagedinthebusinessofdevelopmentoflandandbuilding,professionaland consultancyservices.TheAOinthepresentcasebasedontheseizedmaterials foundduringthesearchu/s132oftheAct,dated04/08/2015intheClarisGroup ofcasesincludingtheresidentialpremisesofShriKiritnA.Shahwherea documentwasrecoveredfromtheLaptopofShriKiritA.Shah,foundthatthe companynamelyAkhileshVentureLLPhaspurchasedpropertyfromtheassessee. Thepaymentforthepurchaseofthepropertywasthroughchequeaswellascash. AspertheAO,thecashpaymentwasnotrecordedinthebooksofaccounts.Thus, theAOafterrecordingthesatisfactionnoteinitiatedtheproceedingu/s153Cof theAct.OnquestionbytheAO,theassesseeclaimedthatthedocumentsseized fromthepremisesofthethirdpartyneitherbelongnorpertaintoitandtherefore thesamecannotbeusedagainsttheassessee.However,theAOdisagreedwith thecontentionoftheassesseeandconcludedthattheassesseehasreceivedcash paymentagainstthesaleofpropertybearingflatNo.402inBelvederePark Scheme,Ahmedabad.Accordingly,theAOheldasunder: FromtheabovesubmissionofAkhileshVentureHoldingsLLP,itiscrystalclearthatthe assesseecompanyhadreceivedRs.1,71,00,000/-incashduringF.Y2013-14relevantto A.Y.2014-15andutilizedthisunaccountedmoneyforwholeoftheyear.Itisalsovery muchapparentfromtheabovefindingsthattheassesseecompanyhasgenerated unaccountedmoneyduringtheyearandreturnedthesameinthenextfinancialyear.The factthatpartofthesumwasreturnedbackinsubsequentyeardoesnotafterthefactthat cashwasreceivedduringtheyearandused. 6.3Inviewoftheabovediscussion,itisclearthatassesseehasreceivedtotalamount ofRs.1,71,00,000/-incashforsaleofFlatno.402inBelvedereParkSchemewhichwas notdisclosedbytheasseseecompanyduringtheyearunderconsideration.Thus,it appearsthataforesaidreceiptofRs.1,71,00,000/-asonmoneyduringA.Y.2014-15was notdisclosedbytheassesseeduringtheyearunderconsideration.Consideringthefacts andcircumstancesofthecase,thereceiptofRs.1,71,00,000/-isconsideredas unexplainedmoneyaspertheprovisionsofsection69AoftheAct. IT(SS)Ano.87/AHD/2021 A.Y.2014-15 3 4.Aggrievedassesseepreferredanappealbeforetheld.CIT-Awhodeleted theadditionmadebytheAObyobservingasunder: 6.14Inassessmentproceedings,copyofpartnershipdeedofAristaGamdiwalaProject wasalsofiledtoAOascalledforbytheAOvidenoticedated19-11-2019.Itwas submittedthattheabovefirmisaseparatelegalentity.Inassessmentproceedings,copy ofindexforsaledeedofflatno.402ofBelvedereParkfiledexecutedbyAristaGamdiwala Project,apartnershipfirmforconstructionpartandShriVinodkumarChunilalPatelfor landpart.Inassessmentproceedings,copyofledgera/cofflatno.402ofBelvederePark filedwhichwasfromthebooksofAristaGamdiwalaProject,apartnershipfirmand separateentityfromappellantcompanym/s.AristaLifespacesPvt.Ltd. W6.15Inviewoftheabovefacts,submissionsandevidences,itwassubmittedthatflat no.402ofbelvedereparkwasdevelopedbyAristaGamdiwalaProject,apartnershipfirm andnotbytheappellantcompanyM/s.AristaLifespacesPvt.Ltd.hence,satisfaction recordedbyAOinthenameofappellantcompanyM/s.AristaLifespacesPvt.Ltd.and noticeissuedu/s.153Carebad-in-law.Itisthereforesubmittedthatassessmentorder framedu/s.153Coftheactisbadinlawanddeservestobequashed. 6.16Havingconsideredthefactsandsubmissionsoftheappellantitisfoundthatthe initiationofproceedingsu/s153CofITActinthecaseofappellantisnotcorrectand unsustainableintheeyesoflaw.Theappellantcompanyateverystageinassessment proceedingsstatedthatexcelsheetsandnotingsarenotbelongingtoorpertainsto assesseecompany(M/s.AristaLifespacesPvt.Ltd),towhomnoticeu/s.153Cissuedby AO. 6.17Inassessmentproceedings,copyofpartnershipdeedofAristaGamdiwalaproject filedtoAOascalledforvidenoticedated19-11-2019.Thusitwasapparentthatthesaid firmwasaseparateentity.Inassessmentproceedings,copyofindexforsaledeedofflat no.402ofbelvedereparkfiledexecutedbyAristaGamdiwalaproject,apartnershipfirm andlandownerShriVinodkumarChunilalPatel. 6.18Inassessmentproceedings,copyofledgera/cofflatno.402ofBelvedereParkfiled whichisfromthebooksofAristaGamdiwalaproject,apartnershipfirmandseparate entityfromappellantcompanyM/s.AristaLifespacesPvt.Ltd.whichhasbeenreproduced bytheAOonpageNo.10oftheassessmentorder.TheAOhasnotrebuttedthesameor didnotobserveanyadversialfactsinthesubmissionoftheappellantthattheaforesaid flatwassoldbyAristaGamdiwalaProject,apartnershipfirmandnotbytheappellant.In supportofthiscontentiontheappellanthasfurthersubmittedthefollowingdocumentary evidencesoftheAristaGamdiwalaProject. ITRacknowledgementandauditedaccountsofAristaGamdiwalaProjectforF.Y.2013-14 Saledeedcopyofflatno.402ofBelvederePark,ExecutedbyAristaGamdiwalaproject. Ledgera/cforsaleofflatno.402ofBelvedereParkfromthebooksofAristaGamdiwala Project. 6.19Inviewoftheabovediscussionandmaterialonrecorditisfoundthatthecontention oftheappellantwascorrectinviewofvariousfactsandevidencesonrecord.Inthe satisfactionrecordedtheAOwasnotedthesaleofFlatNo.402BelvaredeParkbyArista GamdiwalaProjectbuttheproceedingsu/s.153ChasbeenissuednotinthecaseofArista GamdiwalaProjectbutinthecaseofappellantnamelyAristaLifesciencesPvt.Ltd.which waswrong.Whytheproceedingsu/s.153ChasnotbeenissuedinthecaseofArista GamdiwalaProjectapartnershipfirminspiteofthefactthatintheassessment IT(SS)Ano.87/AHD/2021 A.Y.2014-15 4 proceedingsthisfacthasbeenbroughtonrecordbytheappellanttothenoticeoftheAO atanumbertimes?TheAOhasnotbroughtanyevidenceorstatementofanypersonon recordtostatethattheaforesaidpropertyhasbeensoldbytheappellantandon-money hasbeenreceivedthereuponbytheappellantitself.Thecopyoftheindexandsaledeed alsoestablishesthefactthattheappellanthasnotexecutedanysaledeedbuttheArista GamdiwalaProjectforconstructionandShriVinodkumarChunilalPatelforlandhave executedthesaledeedinfavourofthepurchasernamelyAkhileshVentureHoldingsLLP. 6.20FurtherongoingthroughtheProfit&LossAccountoftheappellantcompanyitwas foundthatithastotalrevenueofRs.31,95,672/-againsttheexpenditureofRs.31,36,083/- resultingintotheprofitbeforetaxatRs.59,589/-.Theaforesaidrevenuewasalsoderived fromlanddevelopmentrecovery,interestincomeanddividendetc.Sotherewasnosale proceedsofanypropertyintheprofitandlossaccountandthesamewereavailablebefore theAObuthehasnotdoubtedintheassessmentproceedings.Sonoconnectionofthe appellantwiththesaleoftheabovepropertyandreceiptoftheon-moneytherefromhas beenbroughtonrecord.Thus,theproceedingsinitiatedbytheAOu/s.153Conthebasis ofthematerialfoundduringthecourseofsearchatShriKiritA.ShahofClarisGroup whichneitherpertainorrelatetotheappellantisinaccordancewiththeprovisionsoflaw andhencethesaidproceedingsarequashed.Inresult,theadditionmadebytheAOis deleted. 5.BeingaggrievedbytheorderoftheLd.CIT(A),therevenueisinappeal beforeus. 6.TheLd.DRbeforeusreiteratedthefindingsoftheAOwhereastheLd.AR filedapaperbookrunningfrompages1to129andcontendedthattheproperty wassoldbythepartnershipfirmnamelyAristaGamdiwalaProjectandnotbythe assessee.Therefore,thesatisfactionnoterecordedbytheAOthattheassessee hasreceivedmoneyincashagainstsaleofflatwasbasedonwrongassumptionof facts.TheLd.ARvehementlysupportedtheorderoftheLd.CIT(A). 7.Wehaveheardtherivalcontentionsofboththepartiesandperusedthe materialsavailableonrecord.Inthesatisfactionnote,itwasallegedbytheAO thattheassesseehasreceivedunaccountedcashpaymentagainstsaleofflat bearingNo.402ofBelvederePark.However,theLd.CIT(A),heldthatthe impugnedflatwasownedbythepartnershipfirmAristaGamdiwalaProject. Therefore,thequestionofanyunaccountedreceiptofmoneyattractingthe provisionofsection69AoftheAct,doesnotarise.Atthetimeofhearing,theLd. DRcouldnotcontrovertthefindingsoftheLd.CIT(A).Hence,wedonotfindany IT(SS)Ano.87/AHD/2021 A.Y.2014-15 5 infirmityinthefindingsoftheLd.CIT(A).Thus,thegroundofappealofthe revenueisherebydismissed. 8.Intheresult,theappealoftherevenueisherebydismissed. OrderpronouncedintheCourton29/11/2023atAhmedabad. Sd/-Sd/- (SUCHITRAKAMBLE)(WASEEMAHMED) JUDICIALMEMBERACCOUNTANTMEMBER (TrueCopy) Ahmedabad;Dated29/11/2023 Manish