Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 420 - ITAT MUMBAIAssessment u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) - additions made of Gross Profit estimated on alleged unrecorded sales and addition on account of undisclosed initial investment - proof of incriminating material found during the course of search conducted on 10.03.2011 under section 132(1) - assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of Gutkha and other Perfumatory items - Held that:- The search assessment or assessment under section 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act the scope of enquiry essentially revolves around the search under section 132 of the Act or the requisition made under section 132A as the case may be. In the present case before us, during the course of search in the assessee’s group of cases under section 132 of the Act dated 10.03.2010, the material seized was the same material which was seized by the Central Excise Department in their search on assessee’s group of cases on 18.09.2007. The material seized by the Central Excise Department during the search was contained in a show cause notice dated 18.09.2007, which was the subject matter of investigation by the Income Tax Department by the ADIT(inv)- Thane. These show cause notice of Central Excise Department dated 18.09.2007, which was in the possession of the Department before the date of search conducted under section 132 of the Act on 10.03.2010. It means that nothing new incriminating material was found during the course of search under section 132 of the Act and even now, the learned CIT DR, could not produce any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 of the Act on the assessee’s group of cases. Hence, in view of the given facts and the case law relied on the by the learned Counsel of the assessee in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015 (5) TMI 656 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], we quash the assessment in all the four years and allow the appeal of the assessee.
|