Dharmanandan Developers vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Dharmanandan Developers, is engaged in the real estate business. During the Financial Year 2018-19, the assessee filed a return of income declaring a total income of Rs. 2,40,97,173/-. The Assessing Officer issued various notices to the assessee, but since there was no response, the assessment was completed based on available records. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had received unsecured loans amounting to ₹16,11,05,296/- during the year. The assessee failed to provide details and supporting documents, leading the Assessing Officer to treat the entire amount as unexplained income under section 68 of the Act and tax it at a higher rate. The Assessing Officer also disallowed the corresponding interest expense of ₹21,92,645/- under section 37(1) of the Act. Additionally, the assessee had claimed purchases of ₹97,06,429/- and labour expenses of ₹1,81,85,212/-. Due to the lack of documentary proof, the Assessing Officer disallowed and added 20% of the total expenses, amounting to ₹55,78,330/-, to the income of the assessee. The total income assessed by the Assessing Officer was ₹19,29,73,444/-.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The legality of the order passed under section 250 by NFAC, Delhi, upholding the additions/disallowances aggregating to Rs. 19,29,73,444/-.
• 2. The failure of the CIT(A) to allow sufficient opportunities to the appellant to produce relevant evidence/documents.
• 3. The failure of the CIT(A) to appreciate the appellant's mail to NEAC on 13.09.2021 with documents/details.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Hindustan Construction Company Limited Vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax

  Mumbai benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Jiwan Abasan Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-12(2), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2016-17Partly Allowed

• ITA No. 6087/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2012-13] ITA No. 6089/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2014-15] The A. C.I.T Vs. M/s Pearls Buildwell Infrastructure Ltd

• P.N. Memorial Neuro Centre and Research Institute Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1)

  D Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• The Dakshin Dinajpur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 3

• UT Starcom Inc. vs ADIT, Circle-3(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘D’, New Delhi benchAY 2006-07Dismissed