Itta/598/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax -Vi v. M/S. Mythri Constructions

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH,HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAAND THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI I.T.T.A. No. 598 of 2012 DATE: 17.07.2013 Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax-VIHyderabad. … Appellant And M/s. Mythri Constructions,Hanamkonda, Warangal. … Respondent This court made the following: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI I.T.T.A. No. 598 of 2012 JUDGMENT:(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) We have heard Sri S.R. Ashok, learned senior counsel for the appellant and gone through the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal. The present appeal is sought to be admitted on the following suggested questions of law. “(A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theAppellate Tribunal is justified in setting aside the addition ofunexplained expenditure under Section 69-C of the Income TaxAct? (B) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in telescoping the unexplained expenditure into cost of construction, in spite ofthe cost of construction being determined by the Assessing Officeron the basis of admitted case of the assessee in the course ofsurvey? (C) Whether telescoping of the unexplained expenditure into costof construction, in addition to what has been claimed by theassessee, can be said to be based on material on record?” We have seen the fact finding of the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal on fact found as follows: “On carefully going through the above working made by theA.O. in respect of cost of construction, we find that the A.O. hasomitted to consider the expenditure made by the assessee by way ofcash to the tune of Rs.27,31,648/-. If the same is taken as cost ofconstruction, the cost and construction per sft., will go up by aboutRs.75/- and ultimately the gross profit of the entire construction will go down. Instead of doing so, the A.O. has considered theunexplained expenditure at Rs.27,31,648/- and added the sameunder Sec. 69-C.” Thereafter, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion, in ourconsidered opinion rightly so, that the Assessing Officer is not right in makingthe addition of Rs.27,61,648/- under Section 69-C which was restricted toRs.20,61,648/- by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In view of the aforesaid situation, we do not find any merit in the appeal,as no question of law is said to be involved for the decision of this Court, asalready on fact the learned Tribunal has found that the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) has rightly applied the law. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. ______________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _______________ G. ROHINI, J