TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] 31, New Delhi dated 25.02.2019 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A), firstly on the point of law that the assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act' for short] is bad in law and the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the same and secondly, the assessee has challenged on merits the addition of ₹ 10 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation was conducted at the premises of S.K. Jain Group wherefrom c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gainst the revenue by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Naval Oil and Containers Private Limited ITA No. 852/DEL/2019 and also by the decision in the case of Adarsh Agarwal 777/DEL/2019 and also by the decision in the case of Saurashtra Colour Toner Private Limited ITA No. 6276/Dell/2018. 9. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer and vehemently stated that on facts of the case, provisions of Section 148 of the Act squarely apply and, therefore, there is no error or infirmity in the findings of the Assessing Officer. It is the say of the ld. DR that information received by the Assessing Officer from the Investigation Wing/the Assessing Officer of the searched person, was not in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the accommodation entries provided by the Group. After examining the details and copies of seized documents, AO is of the view that assessee company has taken the accommodation entries amounting to ₹ 25 lacs in FY 2008-09 from S.K. Jain Group of Companies and specifically from M/s Shalini Holding Ltd. in the garb of share application money on 30.08.2008. On the basis of this information found during the search, AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 8.3.2016 after recording the reasons in writing and after obtaining sanction u/s. 151(1) of the Act from PCIT, Delhi-6, New Delhi which was served upon the assessee on 10.3.2016 by speed post. In response to the same, assessee filed a letter dated 06.4.2016 wherein it was submitted tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 147 of the Act. He draw my attention towards a small paper book containing pages 1-62 in which he has attached various documentary evidences including various judgements on the issue in dispute and stated that the ground no. 3 has already been adjudicated and decided in favour of the assessee by the various Benches of the ITAT including the ITAT, SMC, Delhi Bench decision dated 08.08.2017 passed in ITA No. 1500 1501/Del/2017 (AY 2007-08) in the cases of Sushil Gaur vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Ghaziabad and Shelly Agarwal. Vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Ghaziabad. He especially draw my attention towards the facts of the case and the decisions mentioned in para no. 8 at page 7 to 9 of the aforesaid Tribunal s order dated 08.08.2017 and requested by fol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the impugned order as well as the Paper Book. On having gone through the decisions cited above especially the decision of Amritsar Bench in the case of ITO vs. Arun Kumar Kapoor (supra), I find that in that case as in the present case before me, reassessment was initiated on the basis of incriminating material found in search of third party and the validity of the same was challenged by the assessee before the Learned CIT(Appeals) and the Learned CIT(Appeals) vitiated the proceedings. The same was questioned by the Revenue before the ITAT and the ITAT after discussing the cases of the parties and the relevant provisions in details has come to the conclusion that in the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 read with section 143(3) of the Act are void ab initio. Hence, the reassessment in question is accordingly quashed. Since I have already quashed the reassessment, there is no need to adjudicate other grounds. 7.1 After going through the aforesaid finding of the ITAT, SMC, Delhi Bench decision dated 08.08.2017 passed in ITA No. 1500 1501/Del/2017 (AY 2007- 08) in the cases of Sushil Gaur vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Ghaziabad and Shelly Agarwal vs. ITO, Ward 2(3), Ghaziabad, I am of the considered view that ground no. 3 of this appeal has already been adjudicated and decided by the various Benches of the ITAT, which I have mentioned in the aforesaid paragraphs and I am of the view that this issue has already been adjudicated and decided in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
