9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are the same, for the sake of convenience we have heard them together and we dispose off the same by way of this common order. 3. Brief facts are that both the assessees are individuals. Shri Raj Kumar Singhania derives income by way of share income and income from other sources. A search and seizure action u/s 132 was conducted in the case of both the assessees on 23.06.2006. Notices u/s 153A was issued. In the case of Shri Raj Kumar Singhania, a return of income was filed declaring income of Rs. 1,67,700/-. In the case of Ms. Priyanka Singhania return of income was filed declaring income of Rs. 2,27,840/-. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, on a perusal of the bank statement filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceeding was pending for the year under consideration as on the date of search and hence there is no abatement of assessment. (c) He is also recorded, that it is not disputed by the Assessing Officer that, no material what so ever, (incriminating material or otherwise) was found during the course search. He held that under those circumstances no addition can be made. (d) While holding so he followed the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Kusum Gupta vs. DCIT, ITA No. 4873/Del/2009, 2501/Del/2009 order dated March, 2013 and granted relief. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal on the following grounds: Grounds of ITA. No.4767/Del/2013 1. The CIT (A) erred in holding that the addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- made on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He pointed out that the Ld. CIT (A) has at page 12 recorded that the Assessing Officer in this case has not disputed that, no material incriminating or otherwise was found during the course of search. He supported the order of the Ld. CIT (A) and submitted that, as no notice were issued u/s 143(2) or any other section, there was no pending case for this assessment year and hence there is no abatement in this case. He relied on the case laws referred to by the Ld. CIT (A). He vehemently contended that no proceeding is pending and under such circumstance, this is no abatement. Hearing power to issue a note u/s 143(2), as per the council, does not amount to a case where proceeding are pending. 12. On the cross objection, he submitted that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch less incriminating material. Under these circumstances, we uphold the order of the first appellate authority who followeds the order of the ITAT in the case of Kusum Gupta (Supra) and held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer is erroneous. 15. In the result the appeals, the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed. 16. The cross objections are on the following grounds: Ground of CO. No.19/Del/2014 "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in making assessment u/s 153A of Income Tax Act, 1961 as there has been no search/ valid search in the case of assessee and, therefore, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should have quashed the issue of notice u/s 153A and assessment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
