THAPAR HOMES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, NEW DELHI

PDF

ITA 1054/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2025AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)23 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

A search was conducted at the assessee's premises on 20.10.2008. This judgment concerns a bunch of cross-appeals for Assessment Years 2006-07, 2007-08 (unabated years) and 2009-10 (year of search). For the unabated years, the Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s deletion of various additions made by the AO. For the year of search, the assessee challenged the validity of the assessment, arguing the Section 143(2) notice was time-barred.

Held

For AYs 2006-07 and 2007-08, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of all additions, primarily holding that no additions could be made in unabated assessment years without incriminating material found during search, as per PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. For AY 2009-10, the Tribunal found that the Section 143(2) notice was issued beyond the statutory limitation period, rendering the assessment order without jurisdiction and therefore quashed it, also nullifying the related penalty under Section 271AAA.

Key Issues

1. Whether additions can be made in unabated assessment years without incriminating material found during search. 2. Whether the assessment order for the search year is valid if the Section 143(2) notice was issued beyond the statutory time limit.

Sections Cited

28(1)(iv), 35D, 68, 69A, 69C, 132, 132(4A), 143(2), 143(3), 153A, 271(1)(c), 271AAA, 292BB, 292C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”, DELHI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Shri Vikas Jain, Hardik Jayal, Nilesh Singh &, Ms. Shrawani Advocates

For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Hearing: 22/05/2025

सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 22/05/2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 19/08/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH: These bunch of seven appeals emanate from search conducted at the premises of assessee on 20.10.2008. Since, the issues involved in these appeals are similar, these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. For the sake convenience, the appeals are taken up for adjudication in seriatim of assessment year. and 570/Del/2017 for AY 2006-07 3. The Revenue in this appeal has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVI, New Delhi (in short ‘CIT(A)’) dated 05.12.2016 for AY 2006-07. The gist of grounds raised by the Revenue in appeal is as under:-  Against deleting the addition of Rs.3,00,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’);  Against deleting the addition of Rs.13,00,000/- made on account unaccounted expenses u/s. 69C of the Act;  Against deleting the addition of Rs.6,35,000/- on account of income from unexplained sources;  Against deleting the addition of Rs.2,15,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act;

3 Thapar Homes Ltd. Group (AYs 2006-07 to 2009-10)

 Against deleting the addition of Rs. 15,639/- on account of unexplained expenses; &  Against deleting the addition of Rs.7,26,250/- on account of unexplained credit u/s. 68 of the Act.

Shri Vikas Jain, appearing on behalf of the assessee at the outset submitted that the search action was carried out at the premises of the assessee on 20.10.2008, notice u/s. 153A of the Act was issued on 13.11.2009. On date of search there was no pending assessment for AY 2006-07. Thus, this is a year of unabated assessment. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed return of income on 30.11.2009 declaring income of Rs. 6,63,439/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) without there being any incriminating material made various additions and assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs.5,48,40,328/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 31.12.2010 passed u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A), inter alia assailing additions on merits as well as raising legal ground. The CIT(A) vide impugned order deleted all the additions on merits but rejected assessee’s plea on legal issue. Thus, the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed by the First Appellate Authority. The ld. Counsel pointed that the CIT(A) while deleting additions has examined the facts and documents placed on record by the assessee, and thereafter on merits deleted the additions. The assessee not only has good case on merits but on legal issue as well, i.e. no addition can be made in the year of unabated assessment in absence of any incriminating material found and seized during search. To support his contention, he placed reliance on the decision in the case of PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd., 454 ITR 212 (SC).