Itxa/1381/2016 Of Principle Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-4 v. M/S. Manav Builders Pvt. Ltd

Priya Soparkar 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1381 OF 2016 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-4… Appellant V/s.M/s Manav Builders Pvt. Ltd.… Respondent --- Mr.Tejveer Singh for the Appellant.Mr.Ravindra Poojary i/by Mr.Ajaykumar Singh for theRespondent. --- CORAM : AKIL KURESHI AND SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 28, 2019. P.C.:- 1.Revenue has filed this appeal against the judgment of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 28[th] September, 2015,raising following questions for our consideration: “(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case and in law, the ITAT was justified indeleting the addition on account of estimation ofprofit on sales not recorded in the books ofaccounts, without appreciating the fact that as perprovisions of section 132(4A), the presumptions arethat (a) the seized documents found in thepremises of the assessee belong to the assessee and(b) the contents of the seized documents are trueand that the assessee had failed to rebut the abovepresumptions? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case and in law, the ITAT was justified indeleting the addition on account of estimation ofprofit on sales not recorded in the books ofaccounts, without appreciating the fact that theincriminating documents of group companies seizedfrom the residence of Ms.Chaulla Joshi (salesexecutive) reveled notings 60/40 denoting 40%cash/on money receipt and certain sale instanceswherein cash had been received which was accepted& conceded by the key person Shri Haresh N.Mehta, of the group in his statement recorded onoath under section 132(4) of the Act on12.08.2006?” 2.Learned counsel for the parties bring to our notice an orderdated 8[th] January, 2019 passed in Income Tax appeal No.980 of2016 and yet another order dated 22[nd] January, 2019 passed in Income Tax Appeal No.1441 of 2016 in case of this very assessee,the revenue's appeals raising similar questions came to bedismissed. The present appeal arises out of the same commonjudgment of the Tribunal. 3.In the result, this appeal is also dismissed. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.)….