Ita/28/2011 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Sanyukta Grih Nirman Sahakari Sansthan Maryadit

ITA No.28/2011 10.11.701 Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate, for the appellant.Heard on admission. This appeal, under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act1961 (in snort, “the Act”), is directed against the order dated10.12.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,|Indore Bencn (in short, “the Tribunal’) whereby it has|dismissed the appellant’s appeal and confirmed the order)dated 18.11.2008 as passed by the Commissioner of Income|Tax (Appeals). Tne assesse is a Cooperative Housing Society and isengaged in providing developed nousing lands to_ itsmembers. A search and seizure operation under section|132(1) of the Act was carried out on 2[nd]and 3[ra]November|2004 at the residence of R. K. Shukla in Bhopal wherein|certain documents relating to the respondent were found andseized. Thereafter, the respondent was issued notice under|section 153-C of the Act for the assessment proceedings. TheAssessing Officer made an addition for membership fee,|admission fee, land development charges, land advances and)sundry|creditorsDytreatingalltnetransactionsas|unexplained credit. Tne assessment order in this regard isdated 21.12.2006. Aggrieved, the respondent filed an appeal|before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The|aforesaid additions were deleted by order dated 18.11.2008.Tne appellant challenged the order dated 18.11.2008 in an)appeal before the Tribunal but it too has been dismissed by|the impugned order. Botn Commissioner and the Tribunal nave neld that theadditions made by the Assessing Officer were without any)relevant material or evidence and he even without saying|tnat the advances made by the members of respondent were|not genuine had wrongly made the addition. They even took|note of the fact that Assessing Officer had also not issued|notices under section 133(6) of the Act to the members of)the respondent. The Commissioner and Tribunal, therefore,|neld that saddiing the respondent with tax burden was notjustified. Also, all the books and records maintained by the)respondent were found to be as per the norms/rules of the|Cooperative Society. The learned counsel for appellant could|not point out any illegality in the concurrent findings arrived|at by the Commissioner and the Tribunal. The findings are)well-founded and unassailable. The appeal does not involve|any substantial question of law. It is accordingly dismissed summarily. (AJIT SINGH)(SUBHASH KAKADE)JUDGE|JUDGE| DpS