9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee filed its return of income on 20.09.2018 declaring NIL income. The A.O. issued notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) along with a questionnaire dated 09.10.2018. 2.1. During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. observed from the balance sheet that the assessee-company had taken unsecured loan of Rs. 10 lakhs during the year under consideration. He, therefore, asked the assessee to provide ITR, bank statements and confirmation of the party who provided the unsecured loan to the assessee-company in order to prove the identity, credit worthiness of the parties and genuineness of the transaction. Since the assessee-company failed to provide any of the above mentioned documents, the A.O. asked the assessee to explain as to why the amount of Rs. 10 lakhs should not be considered as bogus/unaccounted income of the assessee. 2.2. The assessee in its response submitted that during search, document at Page number.46 of Annexure- 10 seized from the premises 17/6, Hanspal Industrial Complex, Mathura Road, Faridabad, clearly states that finally Shri Abhay Salwan made payment of Rs. 75 lakhs from his various firms. Accordingly, an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- was received in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O. accordingly made addition of Rs. 10 lakhs to the NIL income of the assessee-company. 2.3. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee apart from challenging the addition on merit, challenged the validity of assessment in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. 2.4. However, the Ld. CIT(A) was not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee. So far as the validity of assessment proceedings in absence of any incriminating material is concerned, he dismissed the ground raised by the assessee by observing as under : "4.3. Vide ground No. 2, the appellant has contested the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153 A on the ground that there was no incriminating material emanating from search. 4.4. Search and seizure proceedings under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter 'the Act') were conducted in the cases of Shri Vishnu Kumar Garg, Smt. Lata Garg, appellant and other group concerns on 28.02,2017. 4.5. The appellant has raised a contention that no incriminating material was found in respect of additions made in this year and therefore, the addition is beyond jurisdiction. During the arguments, the AR basically relied on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. Because the action for initiation, continuation and conclusion of assessment proceedings u/s 153A at an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- is being challenged on facts & law. 2. Because the action is being challenged on facts & law for making additions in assessment proceedings u/s 153 A when there is no incriminating material/document found during the course of search u/s 132 of the Act for the impugned year. 3. Because the action is being challenged on facts & law for making the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- by invoking provisions u/s 68, which is ignoring and overlooking the explanation and without assigning the reason to the basis of rejection of the explanation hence mechanically passing the assessment order. 4. Alternatively and without prejudice to above, the action for not allowing telescoping of addition on account of unsecured loan against addition on account of undisclosed income of group concerns/director is challenged on facts and law as both additions cannot be made. 5. For any consequential relief and/or legal claim arising out of this appeal and for any addition, deletion, amendment and modification in the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in his another plank of arguments drew the attention of the Bench to the assessment order and submitted that the addition of Rs. 10 lakhs has been made on the basis of post-search enquiry i.e., from the perusal of the balance-sheet only. Therefore, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search, no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee. For the above proposition, Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del.) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., Singhad Technical Education Society reported in [2017] 397 ITR 344 (SC). 7.2. So far as the merits of the case is concerned, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the assessee has taken loan from SBN Construction on 28.04.2014 and full details were given before the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) and, therefore, without considering the same when assessee had given full details proving the ingredients of Section 68 of the I.T. Act, no addition should have been made. 8. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the A.O. and the Ld. CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
