Ita/176/2015 Of M/S.romaa Builders v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2015/29TH ASHADHA, 1937 ITA.No. 176 of 2015 () ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 363/2014 of INCOME TAX APPELLATETRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN DATED 12.02.2015. APPELLANT: ------------------------ M/S.ROMAA BUILDERS NO.32/1642, 2ND FLOOR, SYED MOHD. COMPLEX, N.H.BYEPASS, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI - 25. BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH SMT.O.A.NURIYA RESPONDENT: ---------------------------- THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2(3), RANGE - 2, KOCHI. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIONON 20-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THEFOLLOWING: ITA.No. 176 of 2015 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT FORTHE YEAR 2009-10 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT. ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 17.3.2014. ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAXAPPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH DATED 12.2.2015. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE smv ANTONY DOMINIC & SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ. ----------------------------------------------- I.T.A. No.176 of 2015 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20[th] day of July, 2015 JUDGMENT Antony Dominic,J. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the orderpassed by the Tribunal in ITA No.363 of 2014. Issue was inrelation to the assessment year 2009-2010 and is about anaddition of Rs.1,41,000/- to the total income of the assessee. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and thelearned Standing Counsel for the respondent. 3. Order under appeal itself shows that in the course ofsurvey, statement of the assessee was recorded under Section133(A) of the Income Tax Act. It was relying on the statementvoluntarily made by the assessee which was not retracted by himat any time during the assessment proceedings and also otherdocuments that were unearthed during the survey, the additionin question was made. In such circumstances, we are unable to find fault with theauthorities in completing the assessment and making the I.T.A. No.176 of 2015 addition on any of the ground that unearthed before us. We,therefore, do not find any substance in this appeal. Appeals fails and accordingly it is dismissed. Sd/ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE smv Sd/-JUDGE SHAJI P. CHALY