9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2019 6. 2592/Del/2022 2017-18 29.08.2022 153A r.w.s. 143(3) 17.12.2019 2. As noted, the captioned appeals were set in motion from search assessments passed under s. 153A of the Act. Accordingly all the captioned appeals were heard together and a consolidated order is passed hereunder: 3. As transpired in the course of hearing, the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 stood concluded on the date of initiation of search and are thus unabated assessment years for the purposes of section 153A whereas assessment years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 were pending on the date of search and thus stood abated. ITA No.1211/Del/2023, ITA No.2588/Del/2022 & ITA No.2589/Del/2022 (Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) 4. Briefly stated, a search under s.132 of the Act was conducted on RNB Group including assessee on 20.04.2017. Consequently, notice under s. 153A of the Act was issued on the assessee and assessment was framed under s. 153A of the Act wherein additions and disallowances of varied amounts were made in different assessment years. The Ld.CIT(A) in the respective first appellate orders passed under s. 250 of the Act confirmed the additions/disallowances. 5. Aggr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d proceedings and therefore, the additions are not sustainable even on merits. For such proposition, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the decisions rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in group cases in Lalita Bajaj vs DCIT & Ors. in ITA Nos.2596 & 2598/Del/2022; ITA Nos.2593, 2600, 2597/Del/2022 and ITA No.2599/Del/2022 order dated 11.10.2023. Besides, these broad issues, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee also raised the issue of mechanical approval granted under s. 153D of the Act. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee thus submits that the additions made by the AO and endorsed by the Ld.CIT(A) cannot be countenanced in law both on grounds of jurisdiction available to the AO as well as on merits, where the AO himself has eventually found the documentary evidences to be satisfactory. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee thus sought the reversal of the additions made by the AO. 8. The Ld.CIT DR for the Revenue relied upon the first appellate order. 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee had challenged the additions made under s. 153A of the Act, both on legal issue as well as on merits. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AY 2012- 13 is reproduced hereunder for ready-reference:- "Kindly refer to the above cited subject wherein the remand report was called in the case of the above mentioned assessee for the AY 2012-13 in relation to the additional evidences filed by the appellant under Rule 46A. 2. The assessment in the case of the assessee was completed on 17.12.2019. Wherein addition of Rs. 1,41,25,000/- was made under section 68 of the IT Act 1961 in the hands of the assessee on account of undisclosed income and credits in the bank account of the assessee. 3. The appellant vide its application before the Ld. CIT(A) in the present case has filed following additional evidences: S.No. Particulars Page No. 1. Copy of replies dated 16.12.2019 along with acknowledgement dated 19.12.2019 and 21.12.2019 filed in response to notice issued u/s 142(1) dated 19.10.2019 218-222 2. Copy of Form 2 Le. return of allotment for year 2007 filed on 24.06.2010 with MCA by RNB Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. 223-238 3. List of share transfer as on 31.03.2012 filed with the MCA by RNB Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. 239-240 4. RNB Leasing and Financial Services Copy of affidavit 241-242 Copy of PAN Card ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Copy of audited financial statements 476-487 Copy of MOA & AOA 488-511 Copy of PAN Card 512 Copy of confirmation filed by Ganeshvani Investment Advisors Pvt.Ltd. 513 Copy of bank statements 514 4. In the application under rule 46A, the assessee has submitted that the credits/funds received in the bank account in the year under consideration are on account of sale of investment held by assessee in preference shares of RNB Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. to RNB Leasing and Financial Services. It is further submitted by the assessee that amount received by assessee from the alleged shell concern was merely on the instructions of RNB Leasing and Financial Services, however, it has no business relation with the alleged shell concerns. Further referring to FORM 2-ie. return of allotment filed on 24.06.2010 and list of share transfer submitted with MCA, the assessee has submitted that investments held in shares of RNB Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. were sold by her @500 per share which were acquired by it directly from RNB Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. @ 500 per share. Referring to the above mentioned additional evidences the assessee has stated that funds received by it in the year under consideration wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the view expressed by the Co-ordinate Bench in group cases in Smt. Poonam Bajaj (ITA No.2593/D/2022); Smt. Pushpa Devi Bajaj (2600/D/2022) & Shri Pramod Bajaj (2597/D/2022) order dated 31.01.2024 where the issue was adjudicated the issue in favour of the assessee. In consonance thereof also, we have no difficulty to accept the contentions of assessee. 15. Thus judged from any angle, the additions/disallowances made by the AO for assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unsustainable in law both on points of jurisdiction and merits. The respective orders passed under s. 250 by the Ld.CIT(A) are thus set aside and the additions made qua these assessment years are reversed. Having held so, we do not consider it expedient to engaged ourselves on other legal aspects raised in the grounds of appeal. 16. In the result, all three captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed. ITA No.2590/Del/2022, ITA No.2591/Del/2022 & ITA No.2592/Del/2022 (Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) 17. The assessment years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 were stated to be pending at the time of search and therefore stood abated. The assessee however broadly contends that the additions have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Ltd. * Copy of return of income 508 * Copy of audited financial statements 509-520 * Copy of COI, MOA & AOA 521-536 * Copy of PAN card 537 * Copy of confirmation 538-539 * Copy of bank statements 540-542 * Copy of assessment order for AY 2014-15 543-544 10. For Raachi Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. * Copy of return of income 545 * Copy of audited financial statements 546-556 * Copy of COI, MOA & AOA 557-568 * Copy of PAN card 569 * Copy of confirmation 570 * Copy of bank statements 571-575 * Copy of assessment order for AY 2014-15 576-577 11. For Seva Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. * Copy of return of income 578 * Copy of audited financial statements 579-589 * Copy of COI, MOA & AOA 590-604 * Copy of PAN card 605 * Copy of confirmation 606 * Copy of bank statements 607-609 12. For Momentum Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. * Copy of return of income 610 * Copy of audited financial statements 611-623 * Copy of MOA & AOA 624-643 * Copy of PAN card 644 * Copy of confirmation 645 * Copy of bank statements 646-647 * Copy of assessment order for AY 2014-15 648-649 13. For Substantial Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Vijay Sanjay Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. 861-865 * Copy of email dated 06.12.2019 from Radheyshyam Upadhyay to ACIT, Central Circle 32 866-868 * Copy of affidavit filed by Radheyshyam Upadhyay vide letter dated 13.12.2019 869-874 * Copy of assessment order u/s143(3) of M/s Vijay Sanjay Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2018-19 875-877 * Copy of confirmation filed by M/s Vijay Sanjay Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. 878 * Copy of bank statements 879-880 19. For Promina Wealth Management Pvt. Ltd. * Copy of return of income 881 * Copy of audited financial statements 882-887 * Copy of MOA & AOA 888-908 * Copy of confirmation 909-910 * Copy of bank statements 911-916 * Copy of MCA Data 917 * Copy of assessment order u/s143(3) of M/s Promina Wealth Management LLP for AY 2018-19 918-919 20. For Panoramic Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. * Copy of return of income 920 * Copy of audited financial statements 921-934 * Copy of MOA & AOA 935-944 * Copy of PAN card 945 * Copy of confirmation 946 * Copy of bank statement of the assessee company 947-948 * Copy of assessment order u/s143(3) of M/s Panoramic Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2018-19 949-950 21. Copy of repl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... em from RNB Leasing and Financial Services out of their disclosed sources of fund. Further, in support of their explanation they have submitted copy of their confirmation, bank statement, financial statements, ITR. The explanation given by assessee is substantiated by the documents submitted. 6. Further, the assessee in the application under Rule 46A has mentioned that during the year under consideration, addition to the extent of Rs. 3,76,00,000/- has been made in respect to the transactions not pertaining to the year under consideration but pertaining to the preceding years i.e. AY 2013-14 & 2014-15. The said contention of the assessee is found in order. 7. It is noticed that the explanation/submission now being made by the assessee was not made during the course of assessment proceedings. During the assessment proceedings ample opportunities were given to the assessee to discharge its onus to substantiate the genuineness of the transactions. However, no plausible explanation was given in this regard at that time. However, the documents now being filed before your good self and replies have also been received from various parties confirming the same. Hence, the decision of co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The plea of the assessee is thus rejected. 21. We however find merit in the plea of the assessee that in view of the averments made in the remand report obtained by the Ld.CIT(A) for different assessment years under appeal, the impugned additions retained by the Ld.CIT(A) is not justified. Where the AO has categorically observed that explanation offered in respect of funds received by the assessee on account of sale of investments held by the assessee in preference shares is substantiated by documentary evidences, the Ld.CIT(A) ought not have brushed aside such view without substantive reasons. Thus, where the AO himself has accepted veracity on source of funds in question, the action of the Ld.CIT(A) confirming the original assessment in ignorance of remand report is not justified without showing how the AO has committed error in such findings in Remand Report. The additions sustained by the Ld.CIT(A) despite categorical observations of the AO in the remand proceedings is thus not sustainable in law in the facts of the case. 22. Similar questions arise in the similar factual backdrop in all the captioned AYs from 2015-16 to 2017-18. Thus, action of the Ld.CIT(A) in all the three ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
