AXTRON TEX-CHEM (INDIA) PRIVTAE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(1), MUMBAI

As identical gr therefore, same were consolidated order fo in assessment year 2 1. The FAA additional gro claimed that 153C(1)(b) w reproduced he 4th Additiona Grounds of Ap conclusion th premises Sea year is conc estimation on in this year. 2. The FAA restricting the purchase as a only. 3. The Appeal 4. The Appel grounds on or 3. Briefly stated fa regular return of inc Rs.2,69,239/-.The r processed u/s 143(1 Act’). Subsequently, a out in the case of ‘S Consequently, a surv out in the case of th Axtron ITA Nos. 4792, rounds have been raised in heard together and disposed of or the sake of convenience. The 2012-13 are reproduced as unde i.e, CIT(A) - 54 Mumbai erred in not ound filed before CIT(A) -54 Mumbai w From AY 2012-13 to AY 2014-15 pro was not applicable abinitio. Additiona ereunder :- al Ground- In view of Ground No 5 in ppeal we would like to add that A.O erre hat Appellant is connected with SVP Gro arch took place on 22.08.2017 as far as cerned. A.O erred in adopting the p n turnover of sales and purchase which is i.e, CIT(A)-54 Mumbai erred in directin e estimation @ 1% on bogus trading against pleaded @ 0.05% on SVP Group l is in time and order. llant craves leave to add, alter or amen r before the final date of hearing. acts of the case are that the a come on 29.09.2012 declaring return of income filed by the 1) of the Income-tax Act, 196 a search action u/s 132 of the Shreevallabh Pittie’(SVP) Group vey action u/s 133A of the Act w he assessee. During the cours Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2 , 4791 & 4790/MUM/2024 these appeals, ff by way of this grounds raised er: accepting the wherein it was oceedings U/s al Ground is n the Original ed in coming to oup on whose this financial percentage of s not the case ng the A.O in of sales and of Companies nd any of the assessee filed its total income at e assessee was 1 (in short ‘the Act was carried on 22.08.2017. was also carried se of the search action at the premis group had made var purchases as well a Assessing Officer n expenditure were re unsecured loan, sha recorded that durin premises of the SVP Cuffe Parade, Mumb data back up in ann related to the assess of incriminating mate of the Act was issue was completed on 2 wherein 2% of the Rs.31,83,73,353/-, w been brought to tax section 145(3) of the 4. On further ap challenged validity of Act as well as the ad the addition on meri challenging validity o way of additional grou Axtron ITA Nos. 4792, ses of the SVP Group it was f rious payments to other entities as bogus expenditure on cap noted that payments made eceived back by the group eit are premium etc. The Assess ng the course of the search u group at 97 & 99, 9th floor, M bai certain incriminating docum nexure A-6, A-9, A-12 were sei ee i.e. Axtron Tex-Chem India P erial related to the assessee, a n ed in the case of the assessee a 20.12.2019 u/s 153A r.w.s.15 e total purchase transactions which was worked out to Rs.66 x in the hands of the assess Act. ppeal before the Ld. CIT(A), f the reassessment proceedings ddition on merit. The Ld. CIT(A) it but did not give any finding of section 153C of the Act which und before the Ld. CIT(A). Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3 , 4791 & 4790/MUM/2024 found that SVP s against bogus ital goods. The against both ther by way of ing Officer has u/s 132 at the Maker Tower “F” ments/computer ized which were Pvt. Ltd. In view notice u/s 153C and assessment 53C of the Act, amounting to 6,67,471/-, has see by invoking , the assessee u/s 153C of the ) though upheld g on the ground h was raised by 5. Aggrieved, the a of grounds raised as 6. The ground No challenging the validi Ld. counsel for the related qua the year search of the SVP incriminating materi Act for the year un counsel further su statement during the the search proceedin case of the assessee i 6.1 On the other ha submitted that thoug group qua the year u at the premises of th engaged in providing statement is having parties other than consideration and t initiated in the case o Axtron ITA Nos. 4792, assessee is in appeal before the T reproduced above. o. 1 of the appeal before us ity of the proceedings u/s 153C assessee submitted that there r which has been found in th P group and therefore, in a al qua the year, proceedings u nder consideration is void-ab ubmitted that there is no m e course of the survey which b ngs, the proceedings u/s 153C is liable to be quashed. and, the Ld. Departmental Rep gh there is no purchase or sal under consideration but in the su he assessee it was explained tha g bogus accommodation entry bearing on the purchase and the SVP group during th thus 153C proceedings have of the assessee. Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. 4 , 4791 & 4790/MUM/2024 Tribunal by way s is related to C of the Act. The e is no material e course of the absence of any u/s 153C of the b-initio. The Ld. material except eing not part of C invoked in the resentative (DR) le from the SVP urvey statement at assessee was bills. Thus, the d sales made to he year under been correctly

We have heard the relevant material the assessee is whet the year under consi a remand report from of the assessee that sale of SVP Group remand report has impugned order. On report, we find that t group entities during year 2014-15. Thu incriminating materia the assessment year the statement of Sh survey proceedings assessee and submi parties from the mar the said cash. The L his statement having parties other than th of the Act was justif statement is recorde Act and not under therefore it is irrelev Axtron ITA Nos. 4792, rival submissions of the parti s on record. The issue in dispu ther any incriminating material ideration. We find that the Ld. C m the Assessing Officer regarding there was no transaction of th during the year under cons been reproduced by the Ld. n perusal of the relevant part there are no purchase and sale g the assessment year 2012-13 us, it is undisputed that al found from the search of the s 2012-13 to 2014-15. The Ld hri Rathod recorded during the u/s 133A of the Act at the p itted that he had arranged c rket and got commission @ 0.05 Ld. DR accordingly submitted t g bearing on the purchase and he SVP group, therefore proceed fied. However, we are of the op d in the course of the survey u the search proceedings u/s 1 vant whether the statement wa Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. 5 , 4791 & 4790/MUM/2024 ies and perused te in the case of was found qua CIT(A) called for g the contention he purchase and sideration. Said . CIT(A) in the of the remand es from the SVP 3 to assessment there was no SVP group qua . DR referred to e course of the premises of the cash for several 5% for arranging that this part of d sales with the dings u/s 153C pinion that this u/s 133A of the 132 of the Act, as incriminating material or not unles absence of any incri the search qua the case of completed as Court in the case of Sheva) Ltd [58 taxma have been upheld b Abhisar Buildwell Pv search in the case of assessment year u therefore falling in following the ratio o Abhisar Buildwell Pv have been made o addition made in res parties other than grounds of appeal are 8. The ground rais are identical to the le Therefore, following legal ground is allow raised on the merit upon at this stage an Axtron ITA Nos. 4792, ss it found during the course o iminating material found durin issues, no addition could have sessment as held by the Hon’bl f Continental Warehousing Corp ann.com 78] (Bombay HC) and by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vt. Ltd. in Civil Appeal No. 658 f SVP group was conducted on under consideration was not n the unabated assessments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court vt. Ltd. (supra), we hold that no otherwise than incriminating spect of commission from trans the SVP group is accordingl e accordingly allowed. sed in assessment years 2014-1 egal ground raised in assessmen our finding in assessment yea wed in favour of the assessee of the appeal not required to nd are left open. Tex-Chem (India) Pvt. Ltd. 6 , 4791 & 4790/MUM/2024 of the search. In ng the course of e been made in le Bombay High poration (Nhava the ratio which in the case of 80 of 2021. As 26.08.2017, the t pending and s. Accordingly, in the case of o addition could material. The saction with the ly deleted. The 15 and 2015-16 nt year 2012-13. ar 2012-13, the e. The grounds be adjudicated

In the result, all Order pronoun (RAHUL CHA JUDICIAL M Mumbai; Dated: 30/01/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.