DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORP. LTD., KOLKATA

Briefly the facts of the case are that assessee had filed its return of income originally on 31.10.2005 showing total loss of Rs.164.76 crores with DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata. The assessee company is a flagship company of Sahara Group’. Special audit under section 142(2A) was also conducted and accordingly assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 18.07 2008 at total loss of Rs.138.58 crores by the DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata. A search was conducted in Radhey Group of cases in Ahmadabad wherein some documents relating to the assessee were seized. As a result proceedings under section 153C read with 153A were initiated against the assessee for several assessment years including assessment year under appeal. The assessee filed return as well as replies and the A.O. completed the assessment under section 153A/153C/143(3) Dated 29.12.2010 and completed the assessment at loss of Rs.138.58 crores. The assessee challenged the assessment order dated 29.12.2010 passed by DCIT, CC-6, New Delhi before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee raised several grounds of 3 ITA.No.6247/Del./2013 Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kolkata. appeals which have been decided by Ld. CIT(A) and appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

As regards the matter in issue, the Ld. CIT(A) noted that earlier assessment have been completed vide order dated 18.07.2008 at a loss of Rs.138.58 crores under section 143(3) and again same income have been assessed under section 153C/153A of the I.T. Act through impugned order dated 29.12.2010, therefore, assessment order under appeal was found to be infructuous and was cancelled. The relevant findings of the Ld. CIT(A) in para 4.7 of the impugned order are reproduced as under :

We have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties. Learned Counsel for the Assessee at the outset submitted that since the original assessment order under section 143(3) dated 18.07.2008 is in different appeals and same in loss have been assessed in the impugned order also, therefore, Ld. CIT(A) correctly cancelled the impugned assessment order. Ld. D.R. however relied upon the Order of the A.O.

After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A) correctly cancelled the assessment order dated 29.12.2010 under section 5 ITA.No.6247/Del./2013 Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kolkata. 153A/153C/143(3) of the I.T. Act. Since in this case similar loss have been assessed under section 143(3) originally vide Order dated 18.07.2009, therefore, the present proceedings under section 153C/143A should have been dropped by the A.O, after verification of the seized material. There were no justification to assess the same loss in parallel proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, correctly cancelled the assessment order. We, accordingly, confirm the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the departmental appeal.

In the result, appeal of the Department dismissed.