TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee sans seized material u/s 153A. Hence, keeping in view, the pertinent facts of the case, we affirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of non- availability of relevant seized material which could have lead to the addition by the AO, hence, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed. - Sh. C. M. Garg, Judicial Member And Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Sh. C. S. Anand, CA For the Revenue : Sh. Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee and the Revenue against the orders of ld. CIT(A)-25, New Delhi dated 28.03.2017 and 01.12.2017. Since, the issue involved in all these appeals are similar, they were heard together and being adjudicated by a common order. 2. In ITA No. 4279/Del/2017, following grounds have been raised by the Revenue in this appeal: 1. That the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is not correct in law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of unexplained share capital amounting to Rs. 3,20,00,000/-. 3. On the facts and circumstances o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he AO order itself? 6. Whether on the facts circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla in holding that the assessment order passed by u/s 153A/143(3) in case of the assessee for AY 2012-13 are not in accordance with law and thus are liable to be quashed ignoring the fact that issue of absence of incriminating document for additions made u/s 153A/153C is pending before Hon'ble Supreme Court? 5. Facts as taken from the record and arguments are as under: 6. The assessee is a company, which was incorporated on 20.03.2008. The assessee had filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 3,16,34,340/-on 31.01.2013. The proceedings initiated u/s 153A were dropped by the Assessing Officer. Thereafter, the proceedings u/s 153C were initiated by the A.O. Accordingly, the A.O. issued notice u/s 153C on 05.11.2015, which were served on 09.12.2015. Thereafter, the proceedings u/s 153C were dropped by the A.O. Thereafter, the proceedings u/s 153A were once again initiated by the Assessing Officer by issuing notice u/s 153A on 04.01.2016. Addition u/s 68: 7. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the order of my Ld. Predecessor in the case of the assessee appellant on similar issues for the earlier period. It is seen that that the AO nowhere stated in the assessment order that a search seizure action u/s 132 was carried out on the appellant s premises no. 115 Vardhman City-2 Plaza, Asaf Ali Road, Delhi. The AO also did not bring on record any documentary evidence to show that appellant was maintaining its business premises at 108-109 Vardhman City-2 Plaza, Asaf Ali Road, Delhi. I therefore, hold that since no search seizure action was conducted on the appellant at its only premises no. 115 Vardhman City-2 Plaza, Asaf Ali Road, Delhi, the proceedings initiated u/s 153A and the assessment order passed by the AO u/s 153A / 143(3) in the case of the appellant for A.Y. 2012-13 are not in accordance with law and thus are liable to be quashed. Even otherwise, the AO made addition of Rs. 10,00,00,000/- u/s 68 on account of share capital, without having any incriminating seized document. Even if the document, which was seized during the search and seizure operation carried out at 108-109 Vardhman City-2 Plaza, Asaf Ali Road, Delhi, where NCML Industries Limited was maintainin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given facts, reliance is being placed on the following case laws: CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016] 380 ITR 573 Cargo Global Logistics Limited Vs. DCIT 18 ITR 106 ACIT vs. Vinita Chaurasia in ITA No. 5957/DEL/2015 dated 05.10.2018 ACIT vs. M/s. Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 2544/DEL/2015 dated 10.10.2018 etc. 14. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla (supra) held as under: vii. Completed assessments can be interfered with by the A.O. while making the assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment 15. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 in paras 69 to 72 has held as under: 69. What weighed with the Court in the above decision was the habitual concealing of income and indulging in clandestine operations and that a person indulging in such activities can hardly be accepted to maintain meticulous b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
