ELENJI KAMALIL V. THOMAS,NAVI MUMBAI vs. JT.C.I.T. 22(3), MUMBAI
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0
ITA 199/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2009-10
Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 199/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Elenji Kamalil V. Thomas, Jcit – 22(2), बनाम/ 212, Vardhaman Chambers, Navi Mumbai. V. Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400 703. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aacpe 7339 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)
For Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43(6)(c)
…he addition of Rs. 77,99,056 is required to be deleted. In support, the assessee relied upon the decision of ITAT , Mumbai Bench in the case of Awadhesh Builders v. ITO, (2010) 37 SOT 122(Mum.) and ITAT , Ahmadabad Benches in ACIT v. National Builders, (2012) 137 ITD 277(Ahd. Trib.). The assessee also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Realest Builders & Services Ltd.(2008)307 ITR 202(SC) , wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that in the absence of any specific finding to demonstrate that there is an underestimation of income, the presumption would be that the entire exercise…