9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred to as the "Act"), the Commissioner of Income Tax (hereafter referred to as the "Revenue") has impugned the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The Tribunal affirmed the order of the Appellate Commissioner (CIT) who had upset the decision of the Assessing Officer (hereafter referred as AO). The question of law which the Revenue seeks to urge before the Court is that the AO was j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver, on 31.03.2015, the assessee had a total income of Rs. 19,06,41,600. The AO added Rs. 17,19,14,701/- under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) which took note of the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 and after noticing that no fresh material was found during the course of the search, thus directed the deletion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased on any incriminating documents, therefore; issue is covered against the revenue by judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla (supra), the appeal of the assessee was accordingly allowed. 4. After considering the rival contention, we are of the view the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to be made under the provision only on the basis of seized material. Furthermore, it was held that in the absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and abetted assessment or re-assessment can be made. In the present case, the Revenue does not urge that it discovered any new material justifying the addition under Section 2(22)(e). Rather, there was no mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
