ITAT Quashes Rs. 14.2 Crore On-Money Tax Demand Against Real Estate Firm
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Pune bench, has revoked a Rs. 14.2 crore tax demand against a real estate firm, ruling that the income tax department lacked concrete evidence to prove alleged on-money transactions in the firm's projects.
ItatReal EstateTax DemandOnmoneyPuneReal Estate PuneAug 05, 2025
Ganraj Homes LLP, a Pune-based real estate developer, was engaged in the 'Ganga Acropolis' project through a joint venture with Kalyanee Fortune Constructions. During a January 2019 search operation, tax authorities alleged the firm received unaccounted cash (on-money) from flat buyers, based on seized diaries and statements from three sales managers. The Assessing Officer (AO) extrapolated these findings, adding ₹2.42 crore for AY 2017-18, ₹5.31 crore for AY 2018-19, and ₹10.43 crore for AY 2019-20 as undisclosed income, totaling ₹14.2 crore. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld these additions.
The ITAT bench, comprising Vice President R.K. Panda and Judicial Member Astha Chandra, noted critical flaws in the department's case. First, the seized documents primarily related to an unsold penthouse, and most flats were sold to buyers different from those named in the alleged incriminating records. Second, the sales managers whose statements were recorded had joined the firm only in 2018, yet the additions covered earlier years. Crucially, neither the managing partner, Subhash Goel, nor any flat buyers were questioned about the alleged cash transactions.
The tribunal referenced the Madras High Court's ruling in CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Son (2008), which held that statements recorded under Section 133A lack evidentiary value unless corroborated. It also cited the Mumbai ITAT's decision in Smt. Madhu Gupta vs. DCIT (2006), emphasizing that employee statements cannot form the basis for additions unless confronted with the assessee. Notably, the CIT(A) had already deleted similar additions for Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, the joint venture partner, in a related case.
The ITAT rejected the extrapolation method used by the AO, observing that no evidence linked the alleged on-money receipts to unsold flats. It highlighted that the department failed to establish a single instance where cash was actually received, trace its utilization, or prove the firm's share in such transactions. The bench emphasized that tax demands cannot rest on 'suspicion, conjectures, or surmises,' citing the Supreme Court's stance in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills (1954).
With the deletions, Ganraj Homes LLP secures a full waiver of the ₹14.2 crore demand. The ruling underscores that tax authorities must base additions on verifiable evidence, not assumptions, especially when dealing with third-party documents and unconfronted statements. The decision also reinforces that extrapolation requires cogent material connecting alleged irregularities to specific transactions.
The order brings relief to the real estate sector, where on-money allegations often arise from ambiguous documentation. By insisting on direct evidence and due process, the ITAT has set a clear benchmark for such cases, ensuring taxpayers aren't penalized based on unsubstantiated inferences.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the ITAT?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) is a quasi-judicial body that hears appeals against orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in tax disputes.
What is an on-money transaction?
An on-money transaction refers to unaccounted cash transactions, often hidden from official records to avoid taxes.
What was the total tax demand against Ganraj Homes LLP?
The total tax demand against Ganraj Homes LLP was ₹14.2 crore, spread across three assessment years from 2017-18 to 2019-20.
What critical flaws did the ITAT find in the tax department's case?
The ITAT found that the seized documents primarily related to an unsold penthouse, the sales managers were not present during the earlier years, and no flat buyers or the managing partner were questioned about the alleged cash transactions.
What is the significance of this ruling for the real estate sector?
This ruling sets a clear benchmark for tax authorities to base additions on verifiable evidence, not assumptions, and ensures taxpayers are not penalized based on unsubstantiated inferences.
Related News Articles
Mumbai's Sky-High Ambitions: Exploring the City's Love for Skyscrapers
As Mumbai continues to grow
Mumbai Records Third-Highest Surge in Luxury Housing Prices Globally
Mumbai's prime residential prices surge 11.5% year-on-year, ranking third globally, as India's economic growth drives demand in luxury housing market.
Affordable Housing Supply Dries Up as Builders Focus on Premium Projects
The latest data from JLL India reveals a 21% decline in affordable housing supply below Rs 50 lakh, while premium projects saw a significant surge in demand.
Priyanka Chopra's Real Estate Empire: A Peek into Her Investments
Priyanka Chopra Jonas is a keen investor in the real estate space, owning multiple properties in India and the US. Here's a look at her recent transactions.
Uber and Heads Up for Tails Expand Pet-Friendly Rides in Delhi and Mumbai
Uber has partnered with Heads Up for Tails to offer pet-friendly rides in Delhi and Mumbai, making travel more convenient and comfortable for pet owners.
Blackstone and Sattva-backed REIT Files Draft Papers for ₹7000 Cr IPO
A real estate investment trust (REIT) backed by asset manager Blackstone Group and Bengaluru developer Sattva Group has filed its draft papers with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for a ₹7000 crore initial public offering (IPO).