Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘D’ BENCH, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM These appeals are filed by the assessee against the respective orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]-29, New Delhi both dated 25.05.2016 pertaining to assessment years 2009- 10 & 2010-11. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, we are dealing with only (AY 2009-10) and the result thereof will apply to other (AY 2010-11) mutatis mutandis.
The grounds raised in ITA No. 4196/Del/2016 (AY 2009-10) read as under:- 1) The assessment order passed u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the subsequent order of CIT(A) are both without jurisdiction and opposed to the mandate of Section 153C of the Act. 2) The assessment not being framed based on any document found from the searched person is without jurisdiction and hence all proceedings initiated u/s. 153C of the Act are void ab initio. 3) The Assessing Officer of the searched person not having recorded “satisfaction”, the assessment framed u/s. 153C of the Act is without jurisdiction. 4) The finding of the CIT(A) that the name of the assessee appears in the appraisal report of M/s Stock Guru being the person searched u/s. 132 of the Act, is not sufficient to invoke Section 153C of the Act. 5) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,00,000/- such a conclusion is opposed to evidence on record. 6) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 70,000/- such a conclusion is opposed to evidence on record. 7) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,36,704/- such a conclusion is opposed to evidence on record. 8) That the above grounds of appeal are independent and without prejudice to one another. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.
The grounds raised in (AY 2010-11) read as under:- 1) The assessment order passed u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the subsequent order of CIT(A) are both without jurisdiction and opposed to the mandate of Section 153C of the Act. 2) The assessment not being framed based on any document found from the searched person is without jurisdiction and hence all proceedings initiated u/s. 153C of the Act are void ab initio. 3) The Assessing Officer of the searched person not having recorded “satisfaction”, the assessment framed u/s. 153C of the Act is without jurisdiction. 4) The finding of the CIT(A) that the name of the assessee appears in the appraisal report of M/s Stock Guru being the person searched u/s. 132 of the Act, is not sufficient to invoke Section 153C of the Act. 5) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,14,753/- such a conclusion is opposed to evidence on record. 6) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,04,000/- such a conclusion is opposed to evidence on record. 7) That the above grounds of appeal are independent and without prejudice to one another. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.