M/S GUN SAGAR BUILD ESTATE,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCHE (A),JAIPUR. BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18

M/s Gun Sagar Build Estate, Vs. ITO, Ward, 6(3) 201-203, Manglam Metro Polis Jaipur. Ajmer Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan. [PAN: AALFG6086D] (Respondent) (Appellant)

Appellant by Sh. P.C. Parwal, CA. Respondent by Sh. Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Addl. CIT. Date of Hearing 02.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 28.07.2026

ORDER Per: Udayan Das Gupta, JM:

These two appeals of the assessee are directed against the orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi, both dated 06/08/2025, are emanating from the order of the AO, NeAC, dated 25.03.2022 passed u/s 147 of the Act, 1961.

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18 2

“1. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.60,52,090/- u/s 28 of the Act on account of alleged undisclosed sales by not accepting the contention of assessee that the sale of the property registered in AY 2016-17 is duly declared in financial statements & ITR of AY 2015-16. 2. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has further erred on facts and in law in not giving any finding on the contention of assessee that in case of alleged undisclosed sales only gross profit can be added and not the entire sales. 3. The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal.” 4. Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee is a partnership firm (PFAS ) engaged in the business of real estate and has filed its return disclosing an income of Rs. 14.87 lakhs. The case was reopened on the basis of information flowing from registration records that the assessee has not disclosed one sale of immovable property amounting to Rs. 60.52 lakhs which was registered before registration authorities on 13th December, 2015( relevant to the assessment year under appeal ). 5. The explanation of the assessee was that the said sale duly registered on 13/12/2015, has been made to one Mr Nasruddin , and the same has already been disclosed under SALES in his books of accounts on the date of booking on 01st December, 2014 ( measuring 1100.38 sq yards ) @ 5,500 / Yards , valued at Rs.60,52,090/- ), in support of which documentary evidence reflecting such sale in sales ledger A/c, audited profit and loss A/c as on 31/03/2015, ITR for the Asst year 2015-16 , has been filed , where the Gross sales for the year ending March

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18 3

2015 was reflected at Rs. 99.79 lakhs consisting of seven parties, out of which the said Mr nasruddin was one of the buyer in the list. 5.1 On verification of documents the observation of the AO was that the ledger A/c of sales for the FY 2015-16, does reflect the above sale but with a narration that the said sale has been registered on 31/12/2015, and the query raised by the AO was that when the accounts for March 2015 has been finalised , how was it possible to foresee the date of registration on 13/12/2015 ,( which for all practical purpose is a subsequent even) , and in absence of any agreement for sale and details of payments being furnished , the said entry in the ledger has been alleged to have been pre- dated. 5.2 The assessment for the year under appeal was completed with an addition of Rs.60.52 lakhs, considering the registered value of the sales effected with Mr Nasruddin, as suppressed / undisclosed for the year under appeal. 6. The matter carried in first appeal has been dismissed by the Ld CIT ( A ) , with the following observation: “The above grounds of appeal are on same issue, hence adjudicated together. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the appellant has sold immovable properties amounting to Rs. 60,52,090/-. It was noticed that these receipts are not shown in the return of income. On examination of the submission of the appellant during assessment proceedings, AO gave the following observations:

"On perusal of sales ledger submitted by the assessee, it is noticed that the sale Page 4 of 7 AALFG6086D-GUN SAGAR BUILD ESTATE A.Υ. 2016-17 ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1041643327(1) entry with respect of Mr. Nasurridin has been made on 01.12.2014 however the narration

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18 4

states that the registry date is 31.12.2015. It cannot be logically concluded how the assessee could foresee on 01.12.2014 that the registration for this particular property will be made on 31.12.2015. So the logical conclusion is that the assessee has made a back dated entry in which case the sales ledger cannot be accepted as genuine. Moreover, the assessee have not given any rationale for booking the revenue in FY 2014-15 whereas the sale deed has been registered in FY 2015-16. No copies of sale agreement, date of payment is received. Further the assessee has not shown any revenue from operation in the ITR of FY 2014-15. Hence, plea of the assessee can't be considered. Hence, Rs.60,52,090/- is hereby treated as undisclosed sale and the same is hereby added back to the total income of the assessee."

The appellant's submission during assessment and in the appellate proceedings is that the whole transaction of properties of Rs. 60,52,090/- has been shown in FY 2014-15. AO has pointed out that registry date is 31.12.2015 in respect of all transactions. Even the registries have mentioned the date of DD/cheques as of December, 2015. Even the cash component as mentioned in the registered deeds is December, 2015. It is clear that transactions were done in FY 2015-16, and there is no reason or point of showing it in one year prior computation/return of income. The conclusion drawn by AO is correct and upheld. Hence, addition made by the AO amounting to Rs. 60,52,090/- u/s 28 of the Act is sustained.

The grounds of appeal is dismissed.”

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18 5

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18 6

effected in favour of Mr. Nasuriddin has been considered and subjected to taxation in the hands of assessee or has it remained suppressed. We find from records produced before us that the said SALE has formed a part of the disclosed turnover for the asst year 2015-16 ( FY 2014-15 ) which is part of revenue from operations and is also duly reflected in the return of income filed on 17th October, 2016 (revised return),accompanied by audited financials and sales ledger, which is accepted by the department. We are of the opinion that once a receipt has formed a part of the gross turnover and subjected to taxation, the said amount cannot be brought into tax for the second time. 11.1 As such we delete the addition of Rs. 60.52 lakhs and allow the appeal of the assessee. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

ITA No: 1513/JPR/2025: Asst year: 2017-18 13. The grounds of appeal taken in form 36 are as follows: “1. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.81,34,410/- u/s 28 of the Act on account of alleged undisclosed sales by not accepting the contention of assessee that the sale of the property registered in AY 2017-18 is duly declared in financial statements & ITR of AY 2016-17. 2. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has further erred on facts and in law in not giving any finding on the contention of assessee that in case of alleged undisclosed sales only gross profit can be added and not the entire sales.

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18 7

I.T.A. Nos.1512& 1513/JPR/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 and 2017-18 8

16.2 We are of the opinion that once a receipt has formed a part of the gross turnover and subjected to taxation, the said amount cannot be brought into tax for the second time. 16.3 As such we delete the addition of Rs. 81.34 lakhs and allow the appeal of the assessee. 17. In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 28.07.2026 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (Udayan Das Gupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member AKV Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T.