SH. DHAN SINGH MEENA, DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA vs. SRISHTI ASSOCIATES, KOTA

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR

Jherh vUuiw.kkZ xqIrk] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihyla-@ITA No. 1189/JPR/2025
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2018-19
LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No. ACXFS7134A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assessee by : Shri S.L. Poddar, Adv.
jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing

: 17/12/2025

mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 17/12/2025

vkns'k@ORDER

PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER .
By way of this appeal, department has challenged order dated
24.06.2025, passed by Learned CIT(A), Udaipur-2 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
2. Vide impugned order, Learned CIT(A) has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee-respondent herein, and set aside the rectification order dated

2
Srishti Associates, Kota.

3
Srishti Associates, Kota.

Assessment Order is rectified
5. Subsequently, order dated 28.02.2023 u/s 154 of the Act came to be passed, rectifying the abovesaid assessment order dated 27.12.2019, and thereby total income of the assessee was computed as under:-
Assessed income as per order u/s 153C read with section 143(3) r.w.s. 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act,
1961 dated 27.12.2019. Rs. 4,02,56,560/-
Demand raised as per original order
Rs. 1,66,20,550/-
Total demand raised after charging tax as per provision of section 115BBE of the IT Act on the undisclosed income of Rs. 3,96,05,000/-
Rs. 3,70,55,474/-

Assessee challenges the Rectification Order
6. The assessee-respondent herein felt aggrieved by the rectification order and challenged the same.
Rectification Order is set aside
7. Vide impugned order, Learned CIT(A) set aside the rectification order by observing as under:-

4
Srishti Associates, Kota.

“During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant submitted that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in ITA No. 587/JP/2024 (Srishti Associates vs. ACIT,
Central Circle, Kota), dated 16.07.2024. In that case, the Hon'ble ITAT held:
"........... It is pertinent to state that when person has not stated anything about the assessee in his statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act during search operation which has a evidentiary value in the eyes of law then any further statement recorded u/s 131 of the Act that too after Hon'ble ITSC order, it shall not be sufficient to make addition in the assessee's case. In view of the factual matrix, we hold that the Id CIT(A) has erred in ITA NO.
587/JP/2024 SRISHTI ASSOCIATES VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,
KOTA confirming the addition in all the four years. In this view of the matter, the appeals of the assessee are allowed."
The Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur has deleted the addition of Rs. 3,96,05,000/- made in the hands of the appellant. As the addition made by the Assessing Officer has been deleted by Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur bench, so chargeability of 60% tax u/s 115BBE is not relevant now. Accordingly, the ground of appeal raised by the appellant is allowed, and the addition made is hereby deleted.
Hence, the ground of appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.”
8. Admittedly, assessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee on the basis of outcome of a search and seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act, carried out on 07.09.2017, at various premises of “Resonance Group, Kota”, to which the assessee belongs.

As per case of the department cash, jewellery and other documents were found and seized from some persons, residence and business

5
Srishti Associates, Kota.

premises ; that some documents/informations seized/collected from others, were found relating to transactions carried out with the assessee or having effect on the total income of the assessee. That is how, notice u/s 153C was issued to the assessee.
On 30.10.2018, the assessee filed return of income u/s 139 of the Act, declaring its total income at Rs. 6,27,310/-.
Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued by the department to the assessee. The assessment proceedings led to passing of the assessment order dated 27.12.2019, whereby total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 4,02,56,560/-, including one of the additions i.e. Rs. 3,96,05,000/- made due to “unaccounted on-money” said to have been received in cash against sale of certain flats.

Admittedly, subsequent to the passing of the assessment order, notice dated 15.02.2023 was issued by the department to the assessee thereby informing that a mistake had crept in the assessment order dated
27.12.2019 i.e. the above said income of Rs. 3,96,05,000/-, on account of “unaccounted on-money” having been treated as undisclosed income as per provisions of section 69A of the Act, which was actually required to be taxed as per provisions of section 115BBE of the Act i.e. @ 60%, but the 6
Srishti Associates, Kota.

assessment order was passed while assessing tax and applying tax rate of 30% instead of 60% as regards said income.
9. The assessee filed its reply to the above said notice dated
15.02.2023. Ultimately, rectification order dated 28.02.2023 was passed while observing that the mistake was apparent from record calling for rectification u/s 154 of the Act, as regards applicability of the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act, as regards the above said undisclosed income of Rs.
3,96,05,000/-.
10. As noticed above, when the assessee challenged the rectification order, Learned CIT(A) allowed said appeal and set aside the rectification order taking into consideration, the submission on behalf of the assessee that while deciding ITA No. 587/JP/2024, filed by the assessee, Co- ordinate Bench, ITAT, Jaipur Benches had deleted the above said addition of Rs. 3,96,05,000/-.
As a result, Learned CIT(A) set aside the rectification order whereby the rate of tax i.e. 60% was made applicable as regards the said income by way of “unaccounted on-money”.

7
Srishti Associates, Kota.

In the given situation, when the addition of Rs. 3,96,05,000/- stood deleted vide order dated 16.07.2024, passed by the Coordinate Bench,
ITAT Jaipur Benches, we are of the considered view that Learned CIT(A) was justified in setting aside the rectification order dated 28.02.2023, whereby higher rate of tax as regards the above said sum of Rs.
3,96,05,000/- was applied, and in allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
12. No other argument has been advanced before us from any side.

8
Srishti Associates, Kota.

Result
13. In view of the above discussion, reasons and findings, present appeal filed by the department deserves to be dismissed. As a result, same is hereby dismissed.

File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17/12/2025. ¼vUuiw.kkZ xqIrk½

¼ujsUnz dqekj½

(ANNAPURNA GUPTA )

(NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member
Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 17/12/2025
*Santosh
आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू
1. The Appellant- DCIT, Central Circle, Kota.
2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Srishti Associates, Kota.
3. vk;djvk;qDr@ Theld CIT
4. vk;djvk;qDr@CIT(A)
5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत
6. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 1189/JPR/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत

9
Srishti Associates, Kota.

Sl. No.

Date
Initial
1
Date of dictation

2
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 17.12.2024
Other Member 17.12.25
17.12.25

4
Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement
17.12.25

5
Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S.
17.12.25

6
Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk
17.12.25

7
Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk

8
The date on which the file goes to the