NAVKAR REALTORS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 19(3), MUMBAI

Order under section 254(1) of Income –tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner (Appeals)-33, Mumbai dated 17th March 2015 for assessment year 2010- 11. The assessee has raised following ground of appeal; (1) The learned Commissioner appeal has erred in sustaining the disallowance made by assessing officer to the total expenses of rupees to 496647/-claimed against the additional income disclosed by the assessee in the revised return of income.

3. None, appeared on behalf of assessee despite sending repeated notice by registered post acknowledgement (RPAD). The notices sent throughRPAD is return back with the remark of postal authorities “left”. Therefore, we left no option except to hear the learned departmental representative (DR) for the revenue and to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record. The learned DR for the revenue supported the orders of authorities below. The learned DR further submits that the a survey under section 133A was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 15th Feb 2011. During the course of survey statement of partner of the assessee was recorded. In the statement, the partner of assessee admitted that they have received cash amount against the sale of flats which were not accounted in the books of account and agreed to offer the cash receipt of Rs. 3,18,74,808/-. In the statement recorded during the survey action the assessee offered additional income. Therefore, there was no question for claiming additional expenses against the additional income 2 offered by the assessee. The assessee claimed additional expenses, which was disallowed by assessing officer and confirmed by learned Commissioner (Appeals).