TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble. We find ourselves in agreement with the contention of the assessee that if the Ld. AO wanted to make addition to the income of the assessee on the basis of material found in the case of other person he should have followed the mandatory procedure prescribed under section 153C of the Act which has not been done. The case of the assessee on facts is covered in favour of the assessee following decisions Kabul Chawla [ 2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , . Meeta Gutgutia [ 2017 (5) TMI 1224 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and Ms. Lata Jain [ 2016 (5) TMI 1273 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . Also ratio decidendi of Kabul Chawla s case [ 2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has been affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs. Abhisaar Buildwell P Ltd. [ 2023 (4) TMI 1056 - SUPREME COURT] We delete the additions sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) and decide ground in favour of the assessee. - Shri N.K. Billaiya, Accountant Member And Ms. Astha Chandra, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate, Shri Aman Garg, CA For the Department : Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the proceedings initiated under section 153A against the appellant and the assessment framed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) are in violation of the statutory conditions of the Act and the procedure prescribed under the law and as such the same is bad in the eye of law and liable to be quashed. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the learned AO has erred, in passing the order despite the fact that the notice issued under section 143(2) is barred by limitation as the same has been issued beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under the Act. 9. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in rejecting the contention of the assessee that notice issued 142(1) of the Act is bad in law as the same was issued prior to the issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. (ii) That the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the action of the learned AO in drawing adverse inference aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition has been made by misinterpreting the statements recorded during the course of search. 17. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the learned AO by indulging in conjecture and surmises only on the basis of presumption and assumption. 18. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the action of the AO in determining the tax liability as per section 115BBE of the Act. 19. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) has erred in facts and in law in confirming interest charged u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. 20. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee individual is partner in M/s. Pawan Synthetic. She filed her return for AY 2014-15 on 31.03.2015 declaring income of Rs. 2,27,880/-. It was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act ). Search and seizure operation was carried out on Bajaj Group of cases on 20.04.2017. The assessee was also covered. Notice under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed additions. The Ld. AR submitted that the return for AY 2014-15 filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter a search was carried on Mr. Vikram Bajaj, Mr. Pramod Bajaj, Mr. Vinod Bajaj, Mr. Radhey Shyam Bajaj and Mr. Krishna Kumar Bajaj on 20.4.2017. During the course of search a key of IDBI bank locker was found. This locker was in the name of Mr. Inder Chand Bajaj and the assessee Mrs. Pushpa Devi Bajaj. Thereafter a search action on 20.04.2017 was carried out on locker No. 474, IDBI Bank Ltd., Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. Copy of panchnama drawn in the name of Shri Inder Chand Bajaj and Smt. Pushpa Bajaj appears at page 3-4 of the Paper Book. It is stated that it is evident from the panchnama and the assessment order that no incriminating document/material was found in search action on the said locker. 9. Our attention has been drawn to the order dated 02.02.2023 of the Tribunal in ITA No. 628/Del/2022 in the case of assessee herself for AY 2013-14 (copy at pages 146-159 of Paper Book) wherein unexplained cash deposit of Rs. 1,50,000/- was added to the income of the assessee as income from undisclosed sources. When the matter reached the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. CIT(A) reduced addition to Rs. 51,250/- on account of agricultural income and maintained the remaining additions of Rs. 93,000/- and Rs. 40,00,000/-. 14. It is not the first year that the assessee has declared agricultural income. In preceding AY 2010-11 and AY 2011-12 also agricultural income was declared and accepted. Details of land holding were also filed during assessment proceedings. Part disallowance sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is therefore unwarranted. 15. As regards the nature and source of cash deposit in IDBI Bank account aggregating in all to Rs. 93,000/-, vide letter dated 15.12.2019 (copy at page 24 of Paper Book) is was explained that the cash deposit is out of old savings, income earned during the year and withdrawal from banks and partnership firm. Nothing has been brought on record to dismantle the explanation of the assessee by the Ld. AO/CIT(A). It is not the case of the Revenue that the IDBI bank account was not declared by the assessee. The addition in our view is not sustainable as it is not based any solid factual and/or legal footing. 16. Regarding credit of Rs. 40,00,000/- received by the assessee in her IDBI Bank account, vide letter dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
