SUNIL CHAUHAN,AGRA V. DCIT CENTRE CIRCLE AGRA, AGRA

ITA 148/AGR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals by Shri Sunil Chauhan against the common order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kanpur, which pertained to separate assessments for the assessment years 2014-15 to 2018-19. These assessments were based on incriminating material seized during a search operation in 2018, which suggested unaccounted income from the sale of plots at 'Shree Shyamji Enclave'. The Assessing Officer had taxed the assessee's 1/4th share in the project under 'capital gains' instead of 'business income' as claimed. The CIT(A) accepted the 'business income' but estimated a margin of 20%, which was contested in the appeals. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument for a lower estimation rate, aligning it with the rates applied to other co-owners.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473840 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN KUMAR YADAV LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEPENDRA MOHAN LD
• Keywords: Business income; Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 44AD; 13

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, AGRA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.148/Agr/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.165/Agr/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.149/Agr/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.152/Agr/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.153/Agr/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Sunil Chauhan 9/47, Pokhar Para Gali Agra 282 003 बनाम/ Vs. DCIT Central Circle Agra ̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ALVPC-9479-M (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Deependra Mohan (CA) – Ld. AR ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025 2 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2014- 15 to 2018-19 arises out of common order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kanpur [CIT(A)] dated 12-02-2024 in the matter of separate assessments framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) / 153A of the Act. The registry has noted delay in the range of 3 days to 13 days in the appeals which stand condoned. The only prayer made by Ld. AR is to make a reasonable estimation. 2. From case records of AY 2014-15, it emerges that pursuant to search action in assessee’s group of case on 19-07-2018 leading to seizure of incriminating material, the impugned assessment was framed. The assessee sold certain plots at ‘Shree Shyamji Enclave’ and on the basis of incriminating material, Ld. AO alleged receipt of on-money for Rs.383.25 Lacs by the assessee through sale of plots during AYs 2014- 15 to 2018-19. After considering assessee’s submissions, Ld. AO brought the same to tax to the extent of assessee’s 1/4th share in the project. The same was assessed under the head ‘capital gains’ as against ‘business income’ as offered by the assessee on presumptive basis u/s 44AD in the return of income filed in response to notices issued u/s 153A wherein the assessee had considered the registered sale price as well as on-money as the business receipts. Similar assessments were framed for other years. 3. The substantive findings of Ld. CIT(A) are contained in para 6.20 onwards. The Ld. CIT(A), considering the fact that the department 3 accepted the business income as offered by the other three joint owners in their respective assessments, accepted the ‘business income’ claim of the assessee. However, Ld. CIT(A) estimated the margin of 20% and re- computed the income of the assessee, for all the years. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. The Ld. AR has submitted that in the case of other joint owners, Ld. AO has estimated addition of 10% and therefore, similar addition may be adopted for the present assessee. The copies of relevant assessment orders of other joint owners have been placed on record. The same has been opposed by Ld. CIT-DR. 5. We find force in the argument of Ld. AR since the other co-owners have been assessed at lower rates on similar facts. Therefore, the higher estimation of 20% as made by Ld. CIT(A) could not be held to be justified. On the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct Ld. AO to estimate the net profit @12% of sale consideration including on-money and re-compute the income of the assessee, for all the years. No other ground has been urged in the appeals. 6. All the appeals stand partly allowed. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद˟ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 28.03.2025 4 आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT AGRA "