DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. S K Z DEVELOPERS LLP, AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s action of estimating on-money receipts and profits was not justified. It also upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to estimate deemed rent at 3% of the project cost.
What were the facts?
The assessee, SKZ Developers LLP, was subjected to search and seizure operations which revealed undisclosed cash transactions related to the sale of real estate units. The Assessing Officer (AO) alleged that the assessee received 'on-money' on the sale of units in two projects, estimating the total on-money receipt at over Rs. 53 crore.
What were the issues?
Whether the AO and CIT(A) were justified in estimating 'on-money' receipts based on seized material and whether deemed rent addition was appropriate.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT567 citing37 ITR 271 · 1959 · SC
- Common Cause v. Union of India267 citing77 Taxmann.com 245 · 2017 · SC
- CIT v. Maulikkumar K. Shah166 citing307 ITR 137 · 2008 · HC
- Jay Builder v. ACIT36 citing33 Taxmann.com 62 · 2013 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta
Consolidated Appeals (3)
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The captioned are the cross-appeals by the Assessee and the Revenue for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 and for AY 2022-23 respectively against the common order dated 29.07.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
ITA Nos.1677 & 1688/Ahd/2024 (By Assessee) & ITA Nos.
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 132
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026