TRITON HOTELS AND RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 4(3), MUMBAI

आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (AM): This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A)-52, Mumbai dated 14.06.2023 for A.Y. 2017- 18. The revenue has raised the following grounds before us: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Learned Assessing Officer in making additions/disallowances in the assessment completed u/s. 153A of the Act without any incriminating documents being found during the course of search.

P a g e | M/s Triton Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(3)

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) as well as Learned Assessing Officer has erred in making an addition based on statement of Jiten Pujari without appreciating the fact that he himself has denied during cross examination before Assessing Officer about authenticity of data in seized diary.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal.”

2. Fact in brief is that search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of the assessee group on 13.07.2020. Thereafter the assessing officer issued notice u/s 153A of the Act on 21.10.2021. In response the assessee filed return of income on 5.11.2021 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. During the course of assessment the assessing officer referred the seized material found and seized from the residence of Shri Jiten Pujari ( keyemployee) of the Triton Group proprietary concern of the assessee from where signed blank cheque book in the name of certain persons were found and seized. The detail of such document has been elaborated by the assessing officer at page 29-37 of the assessment order. On the perusal of the seized documents and statement u/s 132 of Shri Jiten Pujari the assessing officer found that Noble India Construction Company NICC has booked bogus expenses and made payment to various parties during the year under consideration. The detail of such payments is as under:

Name of the PAN Amount Person/Entity Manoj Enterprises AHTPP6023G 4,49,540 Total 4,49,540 The assessee was asked to show cause to explain why not the said expenses booked by the assessse should not be treated as non-genuine. The assessee explained that M/s Manoj Enterprises used to execute the P a g e | M/s Triton Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-4(3) labour piece rate work at the hotel and referred the supporting document i.e. ledger account, work order, copy of invoices, bank statement etc. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and observed after perusal of the invoices issued by M/s Manoj Enterprise that the same were unsigned and even it did not contain the essential particulars likeaddress and other detail of M/s Manoj Enterprises. The AO also found that M/s Manoj Enterprises had issued invoices for the work which had already been completed. In view of the various discrepancies above as discussed above, the AO held that assessee has booked bogus non-genuine expenses of Rs.449,540/- and same was disallowed u/s 37(c) of theAct.

of the assesse are dismissed.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.10.2023