9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2013-14. Since the issues involved in all these cases are similar and interconnected, therefore, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this common order. 2. Briefly stated, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was carried out on Priya Gold group of cases including the assessee herein on 16.02.2014. Consequently, notices under Section 153A was issued for the various assessment years in question and the assessment was framed u/s. 153A r.w. Section 143(3) of the Act. 3. The assessee challenged the various additions and disallowances made in the search assessment before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) took note of the legal position as enunciated by the judici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions in the light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and many other decisions. It was pointed out that the legal position is settled, and therefore, the additions made by the Assessing Officer in Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11 are not sustainable in the eyes of law as rightly held by the CIT(A). He thus submitted that no interference with the order of the CIT(A) is called for in so far as Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11 are concerned. He however fairly submitted that the Assessment Year 2013-14 was unabated at the relevant time of search, and therefore, legal position laid down by the judicial precedents are not applicable to the unabated assessments. Ld. counsel thus submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessed is the total income of the assessee, i.e., both disclosed and undisclosed. It was further contended that present scheme under Section 153A of the Act is in departure with the old scheme of the block assessment where the additions/adjustments could be made only on the basis of incriminating documents found in the course of search. No such legal requirement of presence of incriminating document per se could be read in the present scheme of search assessment in operation. The ld. CIT-DR referred to the judicial precedents in the case of E.M. Gopa Kumar vs. CIT, 75 taxmann.com 215 (Ker.) and Canara Housing Development Company vs. DCIT (2011) 49 taxmann.com 98 (Kar) to buttress the aforesaid contention on behalf of the Revenue. Ld. CIT-D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC). Having regard to the binding judicial precedent available in favour of the assessee rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla and Meeta Gutgutia, the plea raised on behalf of the Revenue appears to be without merit in the case of concluded assessment concerning Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11. We thus see no legal infirmity with the order of the CIT(A) in ITAs No. 4971/Del/2017 and 4972/Del/2017. 9. In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITAs No. 4971/Del/2017 and 4972/Del/2017 concerning Assessment Years 2009-10 and 2010-11 are dismissed. 10. We now advert to ITA No. 4975/Del/2017 concerning Assessment Year 2013-14. The CIT(A) has adjudicated the legal ground in favour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
