SMT PRANITA PANKAJ THAKUR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER. WARD 4(1), MUMBAI

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax in confirming the addition of Rs.7,50,000/-on account of unexplained investments.

The assessee craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing.

The assessee prays for justice”

Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income electronically on 27.11.2012 declaring total income at Rs. 11,09,580/-. Subsequently, a search u/s 132 of Income Tax Act, 1968 [in short the ‘the Act’] was carried out in the case of ‘Swastik’ group of cases on 31.07.2014. The assessee individually was also part of the ‘Swastik’ group, who was engaged in the business of the real estate development and dealing in land and its development. On the basis of the documents seized from the premises of the ‘Swastik’ group, it was found that the assessee had a credit of some of Rs. 7,50,000/- in cash during the financial year 2010-11 relevant to the A.Y. under consideration in its capital account. According to the Ld.AO, sources of the said cash was not explained and therefore, he recorded reasons to believe that income was escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 28.01.2016. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee explained that source of the cash was from cash

The Ld. Counsel further referred to the proof of submission of the cash book before the Income Tax Settlement Commission as Annexure A, which is available on paper book page No. 20. Further the Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Coordinate bench in another entity of the Swastik group namely M/s. Swastik construction in ITAT No. 4818/Mum/2023 for A.Y. 2010-11, wherein amount of the disclosure as part of the cash flow statement filed before the Hon’ble ITSC was accepted and no separate addition was made in the hands of said assessee. Therelevant part of the decision is as under: “7. We find that the application filed before the Hon'ble ITSC was admitted vide order dated 26/12/2019 passed under section 245D(1) of the Act and subsequently, the order under section 245D(4) of the Act was passed by the Hon'ble ITSC on 25/09/2023. In order to substantiate the payment of tax by Sharp Realtors on the disclosure of additional income, the assessee has placed on record the details of the self-assessment tax paid and the copy of Form 26AS. We further find that all these details were also furnished before the learned CIT(A) and submission was made that the Swastik group has duly considered the amount of ₹21,65,000 for arriving at its taxable income while filing its application before the Hon'ble ITSC. However, we find that the learned CIT(A) merely proceeded on the basis that the taxpayers before the Hon'ble ITSC do not include the name of the assessee. Having

In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the opinion that when said amount of Rs. 7,50,000/- has already been offered for taxation and considered in the combined cash flow statement for the Swastik group entity and said disclosure made by group has already been accepted by the Hon’ble ITSC and taxes have already been paid on said disclosure in the income finally computed by the ITSC. Therefore, in our opinion, no further addition is required to be made in the hands of the assessee. The said addition made of Rs. 7,50,000/- by Ld.AO is accordingly deleted. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/04/2025. (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 30/04/2025 Disha Raut, Stenographer

The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file.