THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S IND SING DEVELOPERS PVT LTD

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), PRESENT ADDRESS DCIT, CIRCLE 3(1)(1) 2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095. …APPELLANTS

The Revenue is in appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) questioning the correctness and legality of order dated 18.07.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Bengaluru (for short ‘Appellate Authority’) in ITA.No.108/Bang/2012 for the assessment year 2006-07, raising the following substantial questions of law: 1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's can be said as perverse in nature in deleting addition of Rs.17.64 lakhs in respect of unproved debts in the case of Shri.Raghunatha (of M/s.Chaithanya Properties) out of Rs.57.11 lakhs by holding that assesse is required to explain credit in his books of accounts and no credit in books of accounts of other party ignoring that assesse has not explained the difference

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in nature in deleting addition of Rs.51 lakhs in case of Mr.Rajendra (Neriga Land) as unproved loans out of Rs.1.75 crores made by assessing officer by holding that assesse has proved that the said entry is wrongly posted on account of Mr.Rajenndra instead of some other party by ignoring that assesse failed to produce confirmation letter from any party"?

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in nature in deleting addition of Rs.24,44,500 as income from sale of lands from M/s.Sapphire Infrastructure transaction by holding that assessing authority has not carried out any enquiry to ascertain genuineness of transaction by ignoring sworn statements recorded assessing authority, financial statements relied upon by assesse and modus operandi adopted by assesse which established that assessing authority was right in making the addition"?

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in nature in deletion of Rs.68 lakhs in respect of unproved loans in the name of

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in nature in deleting additions made by assessing authority by ignoring the materials on record, findings of assessing authority and failure on part of assessee that the amounts in question were disclosed in books of accounts of assesee"?

Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the tax effect in this appeal is less than Rs.2 Crores and therefore, the appeal should not be entertained at the instance of the revenue in view of the Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. It is also submitted that the aforesaid Circular binds the revenue.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submits that he be granted liberty to revive the appeal in case the matter falls within the exceptions under

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for by the learned counsel for the revenue. However, the question of law is kept open to be adjudicated in an appropriate proceeding.