DCIT, CIRCLE -6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. ASCENT BUILDHOME DEVELOPERS LIMITED, ADARSH NAGAR, JAIPUR
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR
Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 846/JP/2024
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14
DCIT,
Circle-06,
J-99,
100,
(Basement),
Fateh
Teeba Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAHCA 6457 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Jitendra Wadhwa, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing
: 21/01/2025
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 30/01/2025
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM
By way of this appeal revenue challenges the finding of the National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [ for short “CIT(A)” ] which was passed on 12/04/2024 and it relates to assessment year 2013-14. That order of ld.
CIT(A) arise because the assessee challenged the finding as recorded in the order of the assessment dated 30.03.2016 passed under section 143(3)
2
DCIT vs. Ascent Buildhome Developers Limited of the Income Tax Act, [ for short Act] by ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur [ for short
AO ]
2. In this appeal, the revenue has raised following grounds: -
“1. On the facts and circumstances and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in admitting the additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962
without giving reasonable opportunity along with evidences to the AO for examining and rebutting the same in remand proceedings.
2. On the facts and circumstances and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in admitting the additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962
without verification of additional evidences by the AO even though the assessee has belatedly filed its ITR and Audit report on 26.05.2014 i.e. after a delay of eight months and no evidences were filed that audit had been conducted on or before 30.09.2013. 3. On the facts and circumstances and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of purchases and development expenses claimed by the assessee in profit and loss account amounting of Rs.
2,90,20,819/-in spite of the fact that the assessee has failed to submit the books of accounts, bills or vouchers etc. to substantial its claim during the assessment proceedings.
Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the record is that return declaring total income of Rs.39,10,260/- was filed on 26.05.2014 through e- filing which was processed u/s 143(1) at the same income. The case was selected for scrutiny and hence a notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 7-9-2015 which was duly served through registered post A/D on 15.09.2015. In response to the notices so issued assessee filed details and explanations which was examined. Assessee was engaged in the business of Real
3
Estate, for which the assessee has shown the sales of Rs. 6,23,30,330/- thereby declaring net profit of Rs. 51,98,803/-.
3.1
Ld. AO noted that the assessee had several agricultural lands at Tehsil Tapukda, Alwar and a residential plot at Jaipur in opening stock.
During the year certain pieces of land were transferred to a firm namely M/s
M.M. Realty wherein the assessee company is a partner. The details of that land were as under:
Date
Measurement of land (in hectre)
Cost of land recorded in books of a/c (in Rs.)
Value adopted by sub