TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Revenue by : Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT.DR. Assessee by : Shri Anurag Sinha, AR. ORDER Per Bench These are Department s appeals and assessee s Cross-objections for Assessment Years 2006-07 to 2007-08 and 2010-11. Since common issues are involved therein, these appeals and Cross-objections are being disposed of by this composite order. 2. Facts, for convenience, are being taken from ITA No.96/Agra/2017 and C.O. No.14/Agra/2018. 3. The following are the grounds taken by the Department: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law in allowing a relief of ₹ 27,79,182/- which has been added on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22) (e) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being decided first. 6. The matter is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by CIT vs. Kabul Chawla , 380 ITR 573 (Del), as followed by us in our order dated 11.09.2017, passed in ITA Nos. 159 160/Agra/2012, in Shri Mahendra Kumar Jain vs. ACIT , (copy at APB 1-9). Our observations are as follows: 6. We have heard both the parties and have perused the relevant material on record. In Meeta Gutgutia (supra), the main contention of the Department before the Hon ble High Court was that the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla , 380 ITR 573 (Del) as regards the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153A of the Act require reconsideration, particularly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of incriminating material found during the search qua each such earlier AY. The decision in Kabul Chawla (supra), was reiterated, holding that the ITAT was justified in holding that the invocation of section 153A by the Revenue for the AYs 2000-01 to 2003-04 was without any legal basis, as there was no incriminating material qua each of those AYs. The question framed (supra) was answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. It was held that in the facts and circumstances, the Revenue was not justified in invoking section 153A of the Act against the assessee in relation to AYs 2000-01 to AYs 2003-04. 9. In the present case, there is no dispute about the fact that no incriminating material / eviden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
