ITAT Pune Judgments — September 2023

The Tribunal found that the NFAC confirmed the AO's order without proper adjudication as required by Section 250(6). Considering the COVID-19 pandemic and the assessee's request, the case was remanded for fresh adjudication.

The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to comply but, in the interest of justice and considering the welfare nature of the legislation, decided to grant one more opportunity. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal held that the Assessee's Cross Objection ground number 1, concerning the breach of the maximum area limit under section 80-IB(10) by combining two flats, is allowed. The Tribunal found that there were separate sale agreements for each flat and they were considered separate even by the completion certificate. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s finding in favour of the assessee on this ground is upheld and will apply mutatis mutandis to the present ground. Regarding the Assessee's Cross Objection ground number 2, concerning unaccounted cash receipts and expenditure, the Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the entire expenditure related to Bawdhan land had already been allowed in AY 2013-14. Thus, the receipts of Rs. 30 lakhs are taxable in AY 2014-15, with no expenses allowable. This ground is dismissed. For AY 2015-16, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's grounds 2 and 3 regarding on-money receipts, as the issue was decided in favour of the assessee for AY 2014-15. Regarding Revenue's ground 1 for AY 2015-16, concerning facilitation/commission income, the Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the addition could not be sustained in the absence of any corroborative evidence, relying on the decision in Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT. The addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- was directed to be deleted.

The Tribunal held that the Assessee's Cross Objection ground number 1, concerning the breach of the maximum area limit under section 80-IB(10) by combining two flats, is allowed. The Tribunal found that there were separate sale agreements for each flat and they were considered separate even by the completion certificate. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s finding in favour of the assessee on this ground is upheld and will apply mutatis mutandis to the present ground. Regarding the Assessee's Cross Objection ground number 2, concerning unaccounted cash receipts and expenditure, the Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the entire expenditure related to Bawdhan land had already been allowed in AY 2013-14. Thus, the receipts of Rs. 30 lakhs are taxable in AY 2014-15, with no expenses allowable. This ground is dismissed. For AY 2015-16, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's grounds 2 and 3 regarding on-money receipts, as the issue was decided in favour of the assessee for AY 2014-15. Regarding Revenue's ground 1 for AY 2015-16, concerning facilitation/commission income, the Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the addition could not be sustained in the absence of any corroborative evidence, relying on the decision in Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT. The addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- was directed to be deleted.