DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that the profit element embedded in 'on-money' receipts should be taxed, not the entire amount. For RK Industrial Zone 16, a profit rate of 25% was deemed appropriate, and for RK Industrial Park Phase 5, 53% was estimated. The Tribunal also held that income from on-money receipts should be taxed in the year the sale deed is executed, not when the money is received, and dismissed the revenue's appeals.

DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that only the profit element embedded in 'on-money' receipts is taxable, not the entire amount. They also ruled that revenue from property sales should be recognized in the year the sale deed is executed, not when the 'on-money' is received. The applicability of ICDS-III was also contested.

DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM., Dr. DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that the reassessment notice dated 29.07.2022 was barred by limitation. It was issued beyond the permissible period under the Income Tax Act, read with the relaxation granted under TOLA, 2020, and the interpretation of Supreme Court judgments.

DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

During the hearing, the assessee's counsel stated that the assessee did not wish to press the appeal and requested its dismissal. The Departmental Representative raised no objection.

The provided judgment excerpt details the facts and arguments but does not contain the tribunal's decision on the appeals. Therefore, what the tribunal held cannot be determined from this text.

DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer had travelled beyond the scope of limited scrutiny, which was the basis for the assessment. The Tribunal followed its earlier decision in the assessee's brother's case, which dealt with identical facts and issues. Consequently, the disallowance and addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT(A) were deleted.

DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding a "sufficient cause" for the late filing. Upon examining the facts, the Tribunal noted that while the AO and CIT(A) confirmed the addition, the assessee claimed compliance with Section 68 and relied on a Gujarat High Court judgment. The Tribunal decided to provide the assessee an opportunity to further establish the genuineness of the transaction before the AO.

DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI (Accountant Member), DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA (Judicial Member)

The Tribunal held that the grounds challenging the validity of notice issued under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act were dismissed in light of previous decisions in the assessee's own group cases. Regarding the profit estimation on 'on-money', the Tribunal found the higher estimations by the lower authorities to be excessive and, following jurisdictional High Court judgments, directed that the profit element on 'on-money' should be estimated at a uniform rate of 10%. The revenue's appeals were dismissed, and the assessee's appeals were partly allowed.