ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE,SECOND FLOOR vs. SHIVA CEMENT LIMITED, ROURKELA, SUNDARGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 388/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 August 2025AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP AND SHRIRAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO's additions were made based on audited balance sheets and ledger copies, not on any incriminating material seized during the search. The CIT(A) had correctly quashed the assessment order for lack of jurisdiction under Section 153A in an unabated assessment year without incriminating material.

What were the facts?

During a search, the Assessing Officer (AO) made additions for unexplained cash credit and disallowance of consultancy charges. The assessee argued that the AO lacked jurisdiction under Section 153A as the assessment year was unabated and no incriminating material was found during the search.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessing Officer had jurisdiction to make additions under Section 153A for an unabated assessment year when no incriminating material was found during the search.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 40(a)(i)(a),Section 194J,Section 153A,Section 132,Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, “DB” BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRIRAJESH KUMAR, AM

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh S. Joshi
For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, DR
Hearing: 01.07.2025Pronounced: 26.08.2025
3.

The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 30.09.2009 declaring total loss of ₹1,88,93,962/-. A search u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was conducted by the Investigation wing in the case of assessee and his group concerns on 24th and 25th September, 2014. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was centralized vide order passed u/s 127 of the Act by PCIT, Sambalpur on 07.04.2015 and 05.01.2016. Accordingly, notices u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 19.02.2016, which was complied with by the assessee by filing the return of income showing the same income as the original return of income. Thereafter, the statutory notices along with questionnaire were issued and duly served upon the assessee. Pertinent to state that the assessee filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court at Cuttack challenging the validity on 153A of the Act, which was quashed by the Hon'ble Court vide its final order dated 29.09.2021. During the assessment proceedings the ld. AO asked the assessee to furnish the information/ details about the share capital issued, subscribed and paid up during the financial year relevant to the assessment under consideration but according to the AO, the assessee did not make any compliance thereto. Thereafter, the assessee was granted another opportunity vide letter dated 15.11.2016, to furnish

4.

The assessee challenged the said assessment before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) allowed the appeal of the assessee by holding that in case of unabated assessment on the date of search the ld. AO has jurisdiction to make addition on the basis of seized incriminating material only and not otherwise. However, in the instant case the ld. CIT (A) noted that there was no incriminating material and the additions were made on the basis of audited balance sheets/ documents filed by the assessee before the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT (A) while deleting the addition held as under: - for A.Y. 2010-11 06. The issue raised in this appeal is similar to one as decided by us in A.Y. 2009-10. Accordingly, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this appeal of assessee in for A.Y. 2010-11. Hence, the appeal of Revenue in is dismissed CO Nos. 2 & 3/CTK/2025 07. The assessee has not pressed the cross objections and therefore, dismissed.

8.

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the COs of the assessee are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26.08.2025.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →