ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GLITZ BUILDERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5790/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 September 2021AY 2008-096 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that no addition can be made under Section 153A if no incriminating documents were found during the specific search action pertaining to the assessee. The reliance on the Kabul Chawla judgment was found to be squarely applicable.

What were the facts?

A search and seizure operation was conducted on the BPTP group of companies, and the assessee, associated with the group, received a notice under Section 153A. Additions were made to the assessee's income based on documents found in an earlier search on other group companies.

What were the issues?

Whether additions under Section 153A are permissible without incriminating material found in the specific search action. The applicability of the Kabul Chawla judgment in cases where no incriminating documents are seized from the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Bhagwani, C.A
Hearing: 06.09.2021Pronounced: 06.09.2021

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No. 5790/DEL/2016
ITA No. 5791/DEL/2016
ITA No. 5792/DEL/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER,

1.

These three separate appeals by the Revenue are preferred against a consolidated order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 30, New Delhi dated 22.07.2016.

2.

Since common issues are involved in the captioned appeals they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

The common grievance in all the captioned appeals relates to the finding of the ld. CIT(A) who held that no addition can be made in an assessment completed u/s 153A of the Income tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act' for short] if no incriminating documents were found.

4.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that search and seizure operation was carried out on the various premises of M/s BPTP Ltd and its group concerns. The assessee company is associated with BPTP group of cases. Post search, notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee asking it to file its return of income within 15 days of service of notice.

5.

The assessee responded to the notice and filed its return of income u/s 153A of the Act.

6.

Income was assessed after making addition on account of interest on post dated cheques amounting to Rs. 4,08,48,675 in A.Y 2008-09, Rs. 3,09,17,775/- in A.Y 2009-10 and Rs. 2,04,63,750/- in A.Y 2010-11.

7.

Additions were assailed before the ld. CIT(A) wherein it was strongly contended that the additions are devoid of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure operation.

Strong reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla 61 Taxmann.com 412 and in the case of Ms. Lata Jain to 276/2016.

8.

The ld. CIT(A) after considering the facts and submissions, found that the addition made by the Assessing Officer is based on incriminating material found in earlier search action carried out u/s 132 of the Act on 15.11.2007 in other group companies and there was no incriminating document found and seized in search action carried out on 07.12.2010 belonging to the assessee. Following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla [supra], the ld. CIT(A) held that no addition can be made in an assessment completed u/s 153A of the Act if no incriminating document is found in the search action.

9.

Before us, the ld. DR supported the findings of the Assessing Officer but could not point out any error in the findings of the ld. CIT(A).

10.

Per contra, the ld. counsel for the assessee supported the findings of the ld. CIT(A).

11.

We have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below.

It is true that during the course of search operation conducted on 15.11.2007, some incriminating documents were found. It is equally true that no incriminating document has been found and seized in the search action carried out on 07.12.2010 and there is no dispute that the assessment under consideration is relating to the search action u/s 132 of the Act carried out on 07.12.2010. These being the facts of the case, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla [supra] squarely applies on the facts of the case in hand and, therefore, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) cannot be faulted with.

13.

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the Revenue in 5791 and 5792/DEL/2016 are dismissed.

12.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 06.09.2021 in the presence of both the rival representatives.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →