TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and seizure proceedings conducted under Sec. 132, no addition in respect of an unabated assessment could be made. CIT(A) in the present case going by the rule of judicial discipline had followed the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. (supra), therefore, no infirmity emerges from his order. - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 3824/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 17-1-2018 - Shri Rajendra, AM And Shri Ravish Sood, JM Revenue by: Shri A.K.S Dehiya, D.R Assessee by: Shri S.C. Tiwari Ms. Rutuja Pawar, A.Rs ORDER Ravish Sood, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-49, Mumbai, dated 11.03.2016, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee were covered under the search and seizure action. The assessee in response to the notice issued under Sec. 153A requested that her original return of income filed on 30.09.2008 against which its income was assessed at ₹ 11,39,48,490 under Sec. 143(3), may be treated as the return of income filed in response to notice issued under Sec. 153A. The assessee thereafter filed the return of income in response to notice under Sec. 153A, declaring total income at ₹ 11,39,48,490/- on 05.06.2013. 4. That during the course of the assessment proceedings the A.O observed that the assessee had earned dividend income of ₹ 3,89,42,949/- which was claimed as exempt. The A.O called upon the assessee to explain as to why disallowance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e search seizure proceedings, therefore, no addition in respect of the unabated assessment of the assessee for the year under consideration could have been made in the hands of the assessee. The CIT(A) while arriving at the aforesaid view observed that the order of the special bench of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 137 ITD 287 (SB) (Mum) was further affirmed by the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in ITA No. 1969/Mum/2013 in the case of CIT Vs. All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd., vide their order dated 27.04.2015 and the appeal of the revenue was dismissed. The CIT(A) on the basis of his aforesaid observations deleted the addition/disallowance of ₹ 68,07,509/- made by the A.O under Sec. 14A for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Logistics Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom), or not. We find that it remains as a matter of a conceded fact that during the course of the search and seizure action conducted on the assessee on 29.08.2011, no material whatsoever was found as regards the disallowance under Sec.14A. We find that the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom) had upheld the order of the special bench of the Tribunal, wherein it was observed that in the absence of incriminating material seized during the course of the search and seizure proceedings conducted under Sec. 132 of the Act, no addition in respect of an unabated assessment could be made. We are of the considered view that as the CIT(A) in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
