Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s Jaycee Sponge Profiles Pvt. Ltd. And Vica-Versa

2015 (12) TMI 551 - ITAT HYDERABAD

Undisclosed investment, unexplained loans and unexplained share application money - assessments u/s. 153A/153C - CIT(A) deleted the addition admitting additional evidence - Held that:- We do not see any additional evidence being admitted by the CIT(A) in disposing of this issue. Assessee only stated the dates and amounts involved and entire information was available with AO consequent to the search and seizure proceedings. Since the Revenue has raised the ground only on the issue of additional e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ver, this opinion that not upheld by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gopal Lal Badruka Vs. DCIT [2012 (6) TMI 657 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] which was rendered on 15-12-2011 much before the order of the CIT(A). In fact, CIT(A) is bound to follow the jurisdictional High Court order. Not only the jurisdictional High Court, but also the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court and Delhi High Courts (supra) have held that for completing the assessments u/s. 153A/153C, AO could take into considera .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

revenue for statistical purposes. - ITA Nos. 1515, 1516 & 1517/HYD/2014, CO Nos. 75, 76 & 77/HYD/2014 - Dated:- 9-10-2015 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, JM And B. Ramakotaiah, AM For the Petitioner : Shri Rama Krishna, Bandi, DR For the Respondent : Shri Kishore Kumar Kabra, AR ORDER Per Bench The appeals are by Revenue and Cross-Objections are by Assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VI, Hyderabad dt. 30-05-2014. Revenue is aggrieved and raised common grounds in all .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

circumstances of the case, and in law, the CIT(A) erred in following the decision in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd Vs. DCIT 137 ITD 287 (Mum.) SB to hold that no addition can be made in the unabated assessments U/s. 153A in the absence of incriminating material found during the course of search. 4. On the facts of the case, CIT(A) is not correct in relying on the decision of All Cargo Logistics Ltd., since in the present case no original assessment was completed U/s. 143(3). 5. The .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

quot;(a) In assessments that are abated, the Assessing Officer retains the original jurisdiction as well as jurisdiction conferred on him under section 153A for which assessments shall be made for each of the six assessment years separately. (b) In other cases, in addition to the income that has already been assessed, the assessment U/s. 153A will be made on the basis of incriminating material, which in the context of relevant provisions means - (i) books of account, other documents, found in th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

09 along with another group company of Sunder Steel Cases. Assessee was issued notice u/s. 153A and in response, Assessee filed returns of income by admitting NIL income. In the course of proceedings u/s. 153A, Assessing Officer (AO) in all the years examined the share application money and unsecured loans received and in the absence of details, the said amounts were brought to tax in respective assessment years. Thus, in all the impugned assessment years, the assessments were completed treating .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee purchased land at Anthireddy Guda Village, Kothur Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District for a sum of ₹ 12,60,000/- as per agreement of sale. The same was registered for a sum of ₹ 6 Lakhs and Assessee accounted the same in the Books of Account. In the course of search and seizure operations, Assessee was asked to explain the difference in sale consideration of ₹ 6,60,000/-. Assessee admitted ₹ 4 Lakhs towards undisclosed payment made for purchase of land. AO brought the ba .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me of execution of agreement which was before the date of incorporation. Since the advance of ₹ 2 Lakhs was paid prior to incorporation of company, company is not responsible for the investment. Subsequently, the seller executed one receipt dt. 4th August, 2003 stating that they had received sums aggregating to ₹ 6 Lakhs till 4th August, 2003 and they have to receive a further sum of ₹ 6 Lakhs only. Company however, admitted income of ₹ 4 Lakhs presuming that previous pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t;5.3 Perused the observations of the assessing officer and the submissions of the appellant. As could be seen from the facts of the case the property under reference was purchased for ₹ 12,60,000/- and registered for ₹ 6.00 lacs, with a sum of ₹ 4,00,000/- was admitted by the appellant, as unexplained investment, though it was paid by the previous promoters and the failure of the Assessee to produce the details for the payment of ₹ 2,60,000/- resulted in the further addi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s that have been brought on record, I am of the considered opinion that the addition of ₹ 2,60,000/- is not sustainable in the hands of the appellant company and this ground of appeal is treated as Allowed". 5.3. We do not see any additional evidence being admitted by the CIT(A) in disposing of this issue. Assessee only stated the dates and amounts involved and entire information was available with AO consequent to the search and seizure proceedings. Since the Revenue has raised the g .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t be made in the assessment without any reference to seized material. In coming to that decision, Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Special Bench of ITAT in the case of All Cargo Logistics Ltd., Vs. DCIT [147 TTJ (SB) 513]. Revenue is objecting the same and raised the grounds accordingly in all the impugned three assessment years. 7. Ld. DR submitted that jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gopal Lal Badruka Vs. DCIT [346 ITR 106] has held that there is no limitation on powers of AO inso .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

kumar Arora [367 ITR 517] (Allahabad) and judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia [352 ITR 493]. Assessee also raised the cross-objections on the same issue, as can be seen from the grounds. 8. After considering the rival contentions and perusing the provisions of law, we are of the opinion that order of CIT(A) in deleting the additions cannot be upheld. It is true that ITAT Special Bench in the case of All Cargo Logistics Ltd., Vs. DCIT [147 TTJ (SB) 513] (supra), .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version