Home › Tax Laws › Shah Realtors v. ACIT (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

Shah Realtors v. ACIT (Mum)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

S. 143(3) : Assessment –On Money- The fact that the assessee has sold flats at an undervaluation does not mean that he has understated the consideration and earned undisclosed ‘on money’. The mere presumption that excess price could have been charged is not a ground for coming to the conclusion that the assessee did charge a higher price. The burden of proving such understatement or concealment is on the Revenue- Addition was deleted .

Allowing the appeal of the assessee ,the Tribunal held that ,  the fact that the assessee has sold flats at an undervaluation does not mean that he has understated the consideration and earned undisclosed ‘on money’. The mere presumption that excess price could have been charged is not a ground for coming to the conclusion that the assessee did charge a higher price. The burden of proving such understatement or concealment is on the Revenue .Accordingly the addition was deleted .  Tribunal considered the  ratio in  in ITO v. Diamond Investment and Properties in ITA No. 5537/M/2009 dt. 29.07.2010  and ACIT  v. Rustom Soli Sethna, ITA No. 5086/M/2014 dt. 22.06.2017, Prashant Arjunrao Kolhe  v. DCIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 156(Mum)( Trib), Aum Shiv Enterprises v. ACIT ITA No. 6985 /M/2010 dt.24.08.2013 (Mum) (Trib), Neelkamal Realtors and Erectors  v. DCIT ITA No.1143/M/2013 dt. 16.08.2013 (Mum) (Trib)  and K.P. Varghese  v. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597(SC). ( ITA No.2656/Mum/2016, dt. 25.05.2018) (AY. 2012-13)

[Click here to download PDF file]