Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Bluemoon Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Versus A.C.I.T., Central Circle-3, New Delhi And Vice-Versa

Assessment u/s 153A - addition based on any incriminating material found during the course of search - Procurement of accommodation entries through share application money from non-descript companies - addition u/s 68 - CIT(A) has deleted the additions after considering the assessments of six share applicants out of eight and has categorically recorded a finding that the additions so made are not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search - Held that:- It is now se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

earch. - CIT(A) has also not recorded any finding as to the material found in the course of search. Therefore, unless it is ascertained as to what material was found on search and whether it was incriminating or not, the decision of making addition by the Assessing Officer and its deletion by the ld. CIT(A) cannot be supported. Besides, the ld. CIT(A) has admitted the additional evidences u/s. 46A. The impugned order shows that the ld. CIT(A) called for the remand report of the AO, but we d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2016 - SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Sh. Ravi Jain, CIT/DR For The Assessee : Sh. S.K. Gupta, C.A. ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member: The above appeal by the Revenue and the cross objection by assessee are directed against the order dated 24.10.2013 of ld. CIT(A)-I, New Delhi for the assessment year 2006-07. The Revenue has raised the following grounds in its appeal : 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in law an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ncome Tax (Appeal) erred in admitting additional evidence under Rule 46A. 4. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. 2. The assessee has also challenged the impugned order in its cross objection on the ground that the Ld. CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts in not quashing the addition of ₹ 1,50,75000/- (wrongly mentioned as ₹ 15,75,000/-) on the ground that the additions in question have no relation whatsoever to the material or evidence found in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

In response to the notice, the assessee stated that the original return already filed on 28.11.2006 declaring loss of ₹ 11,300/- be treated as filed in response to notice issued u/s. 153A. The AO noticed in the assessment proceedings that during the year under consideration the assessee has shown receipt of share application money of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- from the eight persons as enumerated in the table given at para 5 of the assessment order u/s. 153A. The Assessing Officer made indepen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and thus, a sum of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- was added to the total income of the assessee u/s. 68 of the Act treating the same as accommodation entry received by the assessee in the form of share application money. The AO further made addition of ₹ 75,000/- on account of commission paid on procuring such accommodation entries. 4. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who after considering the assessments of six share applicants out of eight and also that there is no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Revenue s appeal contended that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the additions without considering the findings of the Assessing Officer in right perspective. The share applicants did not comply with the summons issued by AO nor filed the requisite details sought by AO. The shares were not allotted despite receipt of share application money. The existence of share applicants also could not be established. Hence, the additions made by AO deserve to be sustained. 6. The ld. AR, on t .....

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(Central) vs. Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) wherein it has been held that in the search cases, additions can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in the course of search, the additions so made by AO have rightly been deleted by the ld. CIT(A). It was also submitted that the Assessing Officer has collected the information about share application money from the books of accounts of assessee and balance sheet. It was also submitted that the ld. CIT(A) should have also dele .....

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 and have gone through the entire material available on record. A perusal of impugned order shows that the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the additions after considering the assessments of six share applicants out of eight. He has also categorically recorded a finding that the additions so made are not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search. It is now settled that in the cases of search, no addition can be made unless there is incriminating material found in the search to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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