Loading judgment…
Facts
Revenue filed appeals against deletion of additions made by AO regarding share application money. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below the prescribed monetary limit for appeals. The appeals stemmed from a search action and assessments under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act.
Held
The Tribunal held that the appeals were not maintainable due to low tax effect as per CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 and were also time-barred. Even on merits, the additions were deleted by the CIT(A) based on a Supreme Court decision, and the revenue could not distinguish the facts.
Key Issues
Whether appeals are maintainable due to low tax effect and time bar? Whether additions made by AO were based on incriminating material unearthed during search?
Sections Cited
132, 153A, 268A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
Appearances: Revenue represented by: Shri S. Datta, CIT, DR Assessee represented by: Shri S. Jhajharia, AR Date of concluding the hearing : 02.01.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 22.01.2025 ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The captioned three appeals by the revenue and corresponding two Cross Objections by the assessees herein have been directed against the separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A). The appeals are relating to different but Page 2 of 5 .: 2121/KOL/2024 & CO 51/Kol/2024 Unicorn Township Pvt. Ltd. & Unicorn Enclave Pvt. Ltd.& CO No.52/Kol/2024 Unicorn Enclave Pvt. Ltd.
Unicorn Housing Pvt. Ltd. AYs : 2010-11 & 2011-12 related assessees and are emanating from the same search action carried out u/s. 132 of the Act in the Uniglobal Group of cases on 09.09.2015 and on subsequent dates and thereafter the assessments were framed u/s. 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the tax effect in all the three appeals is less than the prescribed monetary limit. 2.1. This circular prescribes that the revised monetary limits shall apply retrospectively to pending appeals as well.
The Ld. DR, however, has submitted that the case of the assessee is covered within the exception as provided under para 3.1(h) of the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2024 dated 15.03.2024. The said clause (h) of the circular No. 5/2024 is reproduced as under:
“h. Cases involving organized tax evasion including cases of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries, or”
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, however, has brought our attention to the impugned assessment order as well as the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to submit that there is no allegation or evidence in file that the this case involves organized tax evasion including case of bogus capital gain/loss through penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries.
We have heard rival contentions and gone through the impugned assessment order as well as the order of the Ld. CIT(A). In these cases, the revenue is aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of share application money received by the assessee, which was treated by the Assessing Officer as income of the assessee from unexplained sources. The facts of the case as well as ground Page 3 of 5 .: 2121/KOL/2024 & CO 51/Kol/2024 Unicorn Township Pvt. Ltd. & Unicorn Enclave Pvt. Ltd.& CO No.52/Kol/2024 Unicorn Enclave Pvt. Ltd.
Unicorn Housing Pvt. Ltd. AYs : 2010-11 & 2011-12 of appeal of the revenue do not suggest that the case is covered within the exception clause as reproduced above. Therefore, these appeals are not maintainable because of the low tax effect in view of the monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT vide Circular No. 09/2024 u/s. 268A of the Act.
In view of above stated position, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed u/s 268A of the Act because of low tax effect than the prescribed limits as per CBDT Circular No. 09/2024 (supra).
Even as pointed out by the Registry the appeals of the revenue are time barred by 59 days. There is no application for condonation of delay has been filed by the revenue. In view of this, these appeals are not maintainable being barred by limitation also.
Even on merits, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), wherein, the Ld. CIT(A) has held that in all these cases assessments were completed/non-abated on the date of search and that the disallowances made by the AO are not based on any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, deleted the additions by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 454 ITR 212 (SC). Ld. DR could not point out any distinguishable fact warranting our interference in respect of the above finding of the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, these appeals of the revenue are dismissed even on merits also.
So far as the Cross Objections are concerned, in both the Cross Objections, only the order of the Ld. CIT(A) has been supported. The assessees in both the Cross Objections are not aggrieved from the order .: 2121/KOL/2024 & CO 51/Kol/2024 Unicorn Township Pvt. Ltd. & Unicorn Enclave Pvt. Ltd.& CO No.52/Kol/2024 Unicorn Enclave Pvt. Ltd.
Unicorn Housing Pvt. Ltd. AYs : 2010-11 & 2011-12 of the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the aforesaid Cross Objections are not maintainable and the same are also accordingly dismissed.
In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue and the corresponding Cross Objections of the assessees are hereby dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 22nd January, 2025.