Facts
A search and seizure action was conducted on M/s. SRS Group, and the assessee was allegedly linked as a beneficiary of bogus entries. The AO made additions on both substantive and protective bases. The CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal but also confirmed substantial additions.
Held
The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s findings to be inconsistent and cryptic. Therefore, the appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to make submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A)'s findings were ambiguous and contradictory, necessitating a remand for fresh adjudication?
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”, DELHI
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA
& 3351/Del/2020 (AY 2008-09) आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
The cross appeals by the Revenue and the assessee are directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 27.02.2018, for assessment year 2008-09.
Dr. Rakesh Gupta, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits at the outset that the CIT(A) vide order dated 27.02.2018 has disposed of multiple appeals by different assessee's. The CIT(A) in a mechanical manner has partly allowed the appeal of assessee without appreciating facts of the assessee’s case. He further submitted that findings of the CIT(A) are ambiguous, hence, appeal of the assessee has to be restored back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The ld. Counsel submitted that a search and seizure action was carried out on M/s. SRS Group. The name of assessee was linked to said group and the assessee was alleged to be one of the beneficiaries of bogus entries provided by SRS Group companies. The AO made addition of Rs.4,00,00,000/-, out of which Rs.2,20,00,000/- addition was on substantive basis and addition of Rs.1,80,00,000/- was on protective basis, substantive addition of the said amount was made in the hands of SRS International Ltd. The CIT(A) on the one hand partly allowed the appeal of assessee and on the other confirmed addition of Rs.3,55,00,000/- on substantive basis. Findings of the CIT(A) are self contradicorty.
The ld. DR endorsed the statement made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and prayed for similar relief in Department's appeal. 4. Both sides heard. Considering the fact that findings of the CIT(A) in appeal by the assessee are inconsistent and cryptic, we deem it appropriate to restore & 3351/Del/2020 (AY 2008-09) cross appeals back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
In the result, both appeals i.e. appeal by the assessee, as well as, appeal by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Monday the 03rd day of March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िद�ी/Delhi, �दनांक/Dated 28/05/2025 NV/- �ितिलिप अ�ेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 1. 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent.