BENGAL SHELTER HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, AM:
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Ld. CIT(A)] dated 7th December, 2023, for Assessment Year 2018-19, which is arising from the assessment order dated 14th April, 2021, passed by the National e- assessment Centre, Delhi (Ld. AO) under section 143(3) read with section 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: -
For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs.60,00,000/- made by the A.O. on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act.
For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs.20,49,96,299/- made by the A.O. on account of the value of land included under WIP registered in the name of West Bengal Housing Board against which the company has subsequently received development rights.
The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds at the time of hearing.”
At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee failed to file certain documentary proof before the learned CIT (A) in support of its grounds of appeal and if an opportunity is granted for restoring the issues raised on merit to the file of the learned CIT (A) then the assessee is quite hopeful to succeed.
On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative though supported the orders of lower authorities but was fair enough in not objecting to the request made by the learned counsel for the assessee
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We note that the assessee which is a limited company engaged in the business of development and execution of real estate projects, filed its regular return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 26th November, 2018, declaring nil income. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny followed by validly serving notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. In reply to questionnaire issued under Section 142(1) of the Act certain details were filed, however, assessee failed to furnish complete details. As a result of which the learned Assessing Officer made certain additions assessing income at approx ₹21.10 crore.
Further, we note that when the assessee challenged the additions made by the learned Assessing Officer before the learned CIT (A) then except filing form no. 35 and statement of facts, assessee failed to furnish requisite information with regard to the issue of recognition of revenue and details of land transfer. Assessee also failed to furnish the evidence to explain the alleged credit received from two parties namely Sivarpan Engineering Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Hori Properties Pvt. Ltd.
Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee has furnished the additional evidences in the paper book containing 87 pages which includes affidavit filed by the assessee, copies of agreement between West Bengal
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd August, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (SONJOY SARMA) (DR. MANISH BORAD) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 23.08.2024 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, Kolkata 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy//
Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata
