INCOME TAX OFFICER-42(2)(3), KAUTILYA BHAVAN, BKC vs. KAUSHIK BALUBHAI MADHWANI, GIRGAON, MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT () & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN () Assessment Year: 2015-16
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal by the revenue is directed against order dated
30/05/2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax
(Appeals)-National faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld.
CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2015-16, raising following grounds:
(i)
“On the facts and is right in deleti
A.O. on account company M/s. Lu
(ii)
"On the facts an deleting the add fact that the sale sale of shares bogus and exemp the assesse".
(iii)
"On the facts and deleting the add fact that the add the basis of the entry provider, w
Income-Tax Act."
(iv)
"The appellant c new ground."
The brief facts Section 143(3) 1961 (hereinaft 22.12.2017, wh addition under transactions of the assessee. 3. Upon appeal, (Appeals) [Ld. C the Income Dec commission inc were paid. Con Kaus ITA d the circumstances of the case and in law ng the addition of Rs. 12,93,50,749/- m of unexplained investment made in the uminaire Technologies Lid" nd the circumstances of the case, Ld.CIT( dition of Rs. 12,93,50,749/- without app e consideration of Rs. 12,93,50,749/- deri of company M/s. Luminaire Technolog ption claimed on such LTCG should not b d the circumstances of the case, Ld.CIT(A dition of Rs. 12,93,50,749/- without app dition was made on account of undisclose statement recorded ws132(4) of the acc which is an evidence as per Section 1 craves leave to amend or alter any grou of the case are that an ass read with Section 147 of the I ter referred to as "the Act") wa herein the Assessing Officer r Section 68 of the Act, accommodation entries alleged the Learned Commissioner o CIT(A)] observed that the assesse claration Scheme (IDS), 2016 an come at the rate of 1%, upon w nsequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dire hik Balubhai Madhwani 2 A No. 2645/MUM/2023 w, Ld. CIT(A) made by the penny stock (A) is right in preciating the ived from the gies Ltd. are be allowed to (A) is right in preciating the ed income on commodation 132(4) of the und or add a sessment under ncome Tax Act, as completed on (AO) made an attributing the dly provided by of Income Tax ee had opted for nd had declared which due taxes ected the AO to verify the asse Aggrieved by th present appeal, 4. We have consid relevant materi assessee broug impugned asse Principal Comm juri iction ove providing an op aside the impu the Act on 24 assessment ord DR. 5. The relevant fin
"Under the c the Assessin the compon taxation, with be regarded interests of th of the Act.
22.12.2017 p
Act is set as Kaus
ITA essee’s claim and grant app he said order, the Revenue ha raising the grounds as reprodu dered the rival submissions an ial on record. The learned c ght to our attention that sub ssment order dated 22.12.201
missioner of Income Tax (Ld.
er the case, called for the rec pportunity of being heard to th ugned assessment order under 4.02.2021, with a direction to der. This fact has not been disp dings of the Ld. PCIT are reprod circumstances delineated above, ng Officer with regard to the id ent of 'Entry Operator Char hout conducting the requisite en as erroneous in so far as it is pre he revenue, within the meaning
Accordingly, the assessment passed by the AO under Section side as per the provisions of Exp hik Balubhai Madhwani
3
A No. 2645/MUM/2023
propriate relief.
as preferred the ced above.
nd perused the counsel for the bsequent to the 17, the Learned
. PCIT), having cords and, after he assessee, set
Section 263 of o pass a fresh puted by the ld duced as under:
, the action of dentification of rges' and its quiries, has to ejudicial to the of Section 263
order dated n 143(3) of the planation 2 to Section 263(1
to conduct t conclusion as order, keepi foregoing p opportunity assessee to f
6. The impugned o to the order of However, the L fact that the im aside by the Ld longer survives, rendered infruct
7. Accordingly, th dismissed as inf
8. In the result, ap
Order pronoun (RAJ KUMAR C
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 20/03/2025
Disha Raut
Kaus
ITA
1) of the Act. The Assessing Offi the requisite enquiries to arrive as per law and frame a de nov ng in mind the observations paragraphs.
Needless to ad of being heard shall be aff file details and furnish its explan order of the Ld. CIT(A) was pas f the Ld. PCIT under Section 2
Ld. CIT(A) failed to take into co pugned assessment order had a d. PCIT. Since the assessment
, any appellate proceedings ari tuous.
he present appeal filed by t fructuous.
ppeal of the revenue is dismisse ced in the open Court on 20/0
S
CHAUHAN)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA hik Balubhai Madhwani
4
A No. 2645/MUM/2023
icer is directed e at a correct vo assessment made in the dd, adequate forded to the nation."
ssed subsequent
263 of the Act.
onsideration the already been set t order itself no sing from it are the Revenue is ed.
03/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.
////
Kaus
ITA ded to :
BY ORDER
(Assistant Re
ITAT, Mu hik Balubhai Madhwani
5
A No. 2645/MUM/2023
R, gistrar) umbai