Commissioner of Income Tax v. Home Developers Pvt. Ltd.

1. These appeals impugn the common judgment and order dated 21.9.2012 oftheIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal in several appeals preferred by both the assessee and revenue. The main appeal ITA No.808/2014 concerns assessment year 2005-06 and the other appealsITA Nos.807/2014, 809/2014,810/2014 and 811/2014 are concerned with penalties imposed by the assessing officer,ultimately interfered with bytheITAT.

2. The proceedings in this case arose on account ofsearch conducted in the premises of one Yogesh Gupta, a director ofthe assessee-company on 28.3.2006. Thereafter, notice under section 153A was issued and a return wasfiled by the assessee. Duringthe course ofproceedings the assessee had 2015:DHC:11938-DB surrendered undisclosed income of ^2 crores for the block period. In the course ofthe search, in addition to this disclosure in the name of Yogesh Gupta further disclosure of crores in the name of Rajiv Bahal and his family members and ?9 crores in the name ofRealtech ProjectPvt.Ltd.and Realtech Construction Pvt. Ltd. was also made. This culminated in the common order ofthe ITAT.

3. Atthe outset we notice that said common order was carried in appeal for assessment year 2004-05 in ITA 803/2014. The Court on that occasion repelled the contention ofthe revenue that the loan were taken and interest payments have been made which had been overlooked by the ITAT. This Court was of the opinion that there was no material in support of such contention. In the present appeal too identical submissions have been made and the questions of law urged are ofthe same kind as was urged in ITA 803/2014. Following the reasoning in ITA No.803/20I4the present appeals have to also be rejected. ITA Nos.807/2014,808/2014,809/2014,810/2014 and 811/2014 are accordingly disposed of.

S.RAVINDRA BHAT,J / R.K.GAUBA,J JANUARY 08,2015 vld