DCIT CEN CIR 3, THANE vs. TEENA HOUSING FINANCE P.LTD, MUMBAI

I heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee-company is engaged in real estate business. It field return of income for the year under consideration on 17.9.2007 and assessment thereof was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessee was subjected to the search u/s. 132 of the Act on 12.9.2012 and consequent thereto the Assessing Officer passed the impugned assessment order u/s. 143(3) read with section 153A of the Act. In the said assessment the Assessing Officer assessed the share capital receipts of ` 50 lakhs as unexplained cash credit.

Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the impugned assessment year is unabated year and hence addition can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found during the course of search. It was submitted that the search team did not find any incriminating material relating to impugned addition of ` 50 lakhs and hence the Assessing Officer could not have made said addition in 153A proceedings. Ld CIT(A) was convinced with the contention of the assessee and accordingly deleted the addition. Aggrieved the Revenue has filed this appeal before us.

Learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the order passed by the Assessing Officer. On the contrary, learned AR submitted that the decision rendered by the learned CIT(A) is in accordance with the decision rendered by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Shiva)Ltd. (374 ITR 645 and accordingly he submitted that the order passed by the learned CIT(A) does not call for any interference.