SANJAY GUPTA,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, NEW DELHI

2 & 2770/DEL/2023 (A.Ys.2012-13 & 2014-15) 2. Since, these appeals emanate from identical set of facts and similar issues are involved in both appeals, these appeals are taken up together for adjudication and are decided by this common order. ITA No. 2769/Del/2023 for AY 2012-13 3. Shri S. K Gupta, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted at the outset that he is not pressing ground no. 1 and 3 of appeal challenging validity of assessment made u/s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee pointed that the solitary issue in appeal is that the addition has been made without there being any incriminating material found during the course of search. He submitted that a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act, was carried out on 02.03.2017. No incriminating material whatsoever was found during the course of search in respect of assessment year under appeal. Nor there was any pending assessment for the impugned assessment year, still the AO made addition of Rs. 9,39,100/- u/s. 69A of the Act.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A), inter alia challenging the addition made u/s. 69A of the Act. The CIT(A) upheld the assessment order. The ld. AR pointed that in the office note the AO has admitted the fact that no incriminating material was found during the course of search relating to assessment year under appeal, nor it is a case of abated assessment. The ld. AR submitted that it is a well-settled law that in the absence of any incriminating material no addition can be made in assessment u/s. 3 & 2770/DEL/2023 (A.Ys.2012-13 & 2014-15) 153A of the Act. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance of the following decisions:

PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd, 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) 2. CIT v. Kabul Chawla, 61 taxmann.com 412 (Del) 5. Per contra, Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR, representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. The ld. DR submitted that during the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, cash deposits of Rs. 9,39,100/- were reflected in bank account of the assessee. The assessee was asked to explain the source of cash deposits. Though the assessee explained that the cash deposits were out of past savings and amount realized from sales, however, there was no documentary evidence to support the said contention. Hence, the AO made addition of said cash deposits u/s. 69A of the Act.