No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member): -
Aforesaid matter is a recalled matter since the appeal as well as cross-objections were disposed-off vide order dated 18/05/2018. However, the order has been recalled vide order dated 15/02/2019 and accordingly, the appeal as well as cross-objection has come up afresh for hearing before this bench.
When the appeal was called for hearing, none appeared for assessee. The perusal of order sheet entries revealed that the assessee has remained negligent to attend the hearing on several occasions. Left with no option, we proceed to dispose-off the same on the basis of material on record and after hearing Ld. CIT-DR. We have heard the arguments advanced by Ld. CIT-DR and perused the orders of lower authorities.
The aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2012-13 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-28/IT-253/ITO-17(2)(1)/2015-16 dated 03/06/2016 on certain grounds of appeal. The revenue has filed revised grounds of appeal on 09/05/2018 along with Form No. 36, which read as under: -
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld.CIT(A) has erred in directing to delete the addition of Rs.14,78,00,145/- on the grounds that the addition emanating from the provisions of Sec.50C of the I.T.Act cannot be made in the case of a builder as the flats sold are their stock in trade and not Capital assets without appreciating the fact that the assessee firm has not substantiated with any documents, evidence and proof the reason for selling the residential/commercial units at less than stamp duty Authority Valuation including the reasons as to why the buyers of the residential/commercial units
Jainam Constructions Assessment Year-2012-13 bought the said properties at less than the Value determined by the Sub