ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 1, BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. GLOBAL TECH PARK PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

ITA 2363/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 July 2025AY 2013-1448 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that for AY 2012-13, the assessment was unabated at the time of the search. Therefore, any addition must be strictly based on incriminating material found during the search, as per the Supreme Court's decision in *Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd.*. A statement recorded under Section 132(4) alone, without corroborating evidence, cannot be considered incriminating material to disturb a concluded assessment. The Tribunal noted that the AO disallowed depreciation based on the Managing Director's statement and lack of log books. The CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to 50%. The Tribunal found that the assessee's argument regarding the unabated assessment and lack of incriminating material was valid. The judgment also discusses the evidentiary value of loose papers and diaries, citing Supreme Court decisions that such materials, if uncorroborated and not part of regularly maintained books of account, do not constitute material evidence. Consequently, additions based on such materials are unsustainable. The Tribunal allowed Ground No. 4, which relates to the validity of additions based on uncorroborated material. Grounds 5 and 6, concerning interest and general issues, were dismissed.

What were the facts?

This judgment concerns 7 appeals, 6 by Global Tech Park Pvt. Ltd. (assessee) and 1 by the ACIT (revenue), for Assessment Years (AYs) 2012-13 to 2017-18. The appeals arise from a search and seizure action on December 1, 2018. The primary dispute for AY 2012-13 involves the disallowance of 50% of depreciation on luxury cars. The assessee's return for AY 2012-13 was filed on September 29, 2012. A search was conducted on February 1, 2018, followed by a notice under Section 153A. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed depreciation based on a statement from the Managing Director admitting personal use of cars and offering disallowance. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the disallowance but restricted it to 50%.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the disallowance of depreciation on luxury cars for AY 2012-13 is valid when the assessment for that year was unabated and no incriminating material was found during the search, as per Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? The assessee argues that the statement under Section 132(4) is not incriminating material for a concluded assessment and relies on *Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd.* (SC). The revenue contends that the Section 132(4) statement is sufficient incriminating material. 2. Whether the disallowance of depreciation on luxury cars is justified on merits, particularly when the perquisite value was taxed in the hands of the director and Section 40(a)(ia) was invoked? The assessee argues that taxing perquisites in the director's hands makes the disallowance in the company's hands improper and that Section 40(a)(ia) is not applicable if the recipient has paid tax. The revenue argues that the CIT(A)'s relief to 50% disallowance is reasonable. 3. Whether the disallowance of depreciation for non-maintenance of log books is reasonable, and if the CIT(A)'s 50% disallowance is justified?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 132(4),Section 143(3),Section 131,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 69,Section 234B,Section 234D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, “A” BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Hearing: 09.06.2025Pronounced: 31.07.2025

Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President

1.

This bunch of 7 appeals, 6 appeals filed by Global Tech Park Ltd. (the assessee/appellant) for the AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 and one appeal

ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 filed by the ACIT, Central Circle 1(1), Bangalore [Id. AO] for AY 2013-14 arising out of search & seizure action carried out on 1.12.2018 involving common grounds and issu

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 153A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →