AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Revenue is in appeal against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the ITAT") dated 13.08.2014 in ITA No. 5459lDe112012. It urges that the impugned order in so far as it upheld the cancellation of the two amounts i.e. Rs. 22 lakhs and Rs. 19,28,684/- assessed by the Assessing Officer (AO) is erroneous.
The assessee had filed its return for Assessment Year (AY) 2007-08 under Section 143(1). The case was taken up for scrutiny and notice was issued. Subsequently, a questionnaire was framed on 18.08.2008 in respect of various items. The assessee was incorporated in 2004 and was engaged in construction of both residential and commercial complexes as a contractor. It also engaged itself in real estate transactions. The survey was conducted under Section 133A in the assessee''s group premises on 15.01.2008, pursuant to which the questionnaire was issued. The assessee in the course of its return filed subsequently itself brought in to add back the sum of Rs. 2,07,94,780/- under Section 40(a) (3) of the Income Tax Act. The AO, in the course of the assessment order, thus added, on the basis of disclosures made, a sum of Rs. 2,40,55,000/- and further added three other amounts i.e. Rs. 19,28,684/-, Rs. 22 lakhs and Rs. 15,26,527/-. CIT(Appea1s) directed the deletion of all the three said specified amounts. Insofar as the last amount was concerned, CIT(Appea1s) was of the opinion that it did not constitute real income since notionally added. With regard to other two amounts, it was noted that Rs. 22 lakhs on scrutiny of accounts revealed was not an amount received but payment made in the course of the assessee''s business. Likewise, the methodology adopted by the A 0 with regard to Rs. 19,28,684/-, when a total surrender had been made, was disapproved. The ITAT in its impugned order affirmed the CIT(Appea1s) ''s decision noting that the two entries in the name of specific individuals made available to the AO. There was no question added with respect to Rs. 19,28,684/- and Rs. 22 lakhs, the findings of the CIT(Appea1s) were affirmed in totality.
Having regard to the restricted nature of jurisdiction of this Court under Section 260-A i.e. by framing substantial question of law, we find no reason to interfere with concurrent findings of fact of the CIT(Appea1s) and the ITAT.
No perversity is discernable. The appeal is consequently dismissed.