9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 581X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs that had commenced under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act', for short). 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee, Smt. Lakshmi Singh, is engaged in the business of plying/hiring carriages on routes allotted by the Government of Karnataka. She had submitted her income tax returns for the Assessment Year 2005-06. During the assessment, notice was issued to her under Section 143(2) of the Act with regard to the fact that she had shown in her income tax returns a gift of Rs. 90,00,000/- from Mr. Harish Wadava of Dubai. Not only she had explained the gift of Rs. 90,00,000/-, made by way of cheques of Rs. 5,00,000/- each, but even the donor, Mr. Harish Wadava, had admitted giving cheques to the assessee. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8.2013, the learned CIT dismissed the said appeal. Therefore, the assessee challenged the order dated 20.08.2013 before the learned Tribunal. By order dated 09.12.2014, the learned Tribunal allowed the appeal, and held that no addition on account of the gifts can be sustained. Hence, this appeal before this Court. 4. Mr. Y. V. Raviraj, the learned counsel for the Revenue, submits that the following substantial questions of law arise in the present case. 1. Whether the Tribunal was right on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law restricting the scope of words 'assess or reassess the total income' in the assessment under Section 153A/153C, by holding that, these assessments are to be made only on the basis of the seized materia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment is reopened under Section 153C of the Act, the department has all the powers as it would have in the original assessment. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was justified, firstly, in calling for an explanation from the assessee; secondly, in holding that the transaction of gifting of Rs. 90,00,000/- was suspicious; thirdly, in concluding that the amount of Rs. 90,00,000/- was the undisclosed amount of the assessee. Therefore, the learned Tribunal was not justified in setting aside either the assessment order, or the order passed by the learned CIT. 5. On the other hand, Mr. H.R.Kambiyavar, the learned counsel for the assessee, submits that admittedly, no incriminating evidence was discovered during the search of the premises b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. 7. A bare perusal of the impugned order clearly reveals that the learned Tribunal was seized with only the issue, whether the power under Section 153C of the Act could be invoked or not, specially when there was no incriminating document or evidence discovered during the search under Section 132 of the Act, against the assessee? Admittedly, the Revenue has not produced any evidence either before the Assessing Officer, or before this Court to show that any incriminating evidence was discovered against the assessee during the search on 25.03.2008. In the absence of any incriminating evidence, the Assessing Officer was not justified in invoking his power under Section 153 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
