Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 against the CIT(A)'s order which upheld an unexplained cash credit addition of Rs.13.60 lakhs made under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This addition arose from assessment proceedings under section 153A/143(3) following a search action under section 132 conducted on 30th September 2015.
Held
The Tribunal noted that AY 2011-12 was an "unabated" assessment year. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023), the Tribunal held that any addition in an unabated assessment must be based on seized or incriminating material. As there was no evidence that the Assessing Officer made the section 68 addition based on such material, the addition of Rs.13.16 lakhs was deleted.
Key Issues
Whether an unexplained cash credit addition under section 68 can be sustained in an unabated assessment year without any seized or incriminating material, particularly after a search action under section 132.
Sections Cited
Section 68, Section 153A, Section 143(3), Section 132
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, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI M. BALAGANESH
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, [in short, the “CIT(A)”] Kanpur’s DIN and Order No. CIT(A)-IV/10643/DCIT- CC/NOIDA/2017-18, dated 04.10.2018 involving proceedings under section 153A/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from learned CIT(DR) representing Revenue that both the lower authorities herein have made section 68 unexplained cash credit addition of Rs.13.60 lakhs in assessment dated 30.12.2017 as upheld in the CIT(A) lower appellate discussion.
Faced with this situation, learned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute the clinching fact emerging from the case file that the impugned assessment year 2011-12 is an “unabated” one since the departmental authorities had carried out section 132 search action on 30th September, 2015. And that hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decision in PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 has settled the law that such an addition involving an unabated assessment has to be based on the seized/incriminating material only. 5. We invited the Revenue’s attention to para 5 in assessment discussion, wherein, there is not even an iota of evidence indicating that the learned Assessing Officer has made the addition in 2 | P a g e assessee’s hands based on such incriminating material. We thus find it a fit instance to delete the impugned section 68 addition of Rs.13.16 lakhs in very terms. Ordered accordingly.
All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.