Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
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: ‘G’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Date of hearing 08.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 08.12.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals & 2070/Del/2025 for assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Gurgaon’s orders, both dated 28.01.2025 passed in case nos. 11638 & 10618/CIT(A)-3/GGN/2016-17 & 2017-18, involving proceedings under section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. A combined perusal of both these case files indicate that the assessee had never put in appearance on the earlier hearings as well. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It next emerges with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that both the learned lower authorities have framed section 153A assessments in the assessee’s case in the impugned twin assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19 thereby making section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE additions disallowing the loans from house property etc. which stand upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
It is in this factual backdrop that the assessee’s identical first and foremost substantive ground alleges that the impugned twin assessments are null and void in the eyes of law since not fulfilling the requisite conditions under section 153A of the Act. That being the case, it is evident to us that the learned departmental authorities had carried out the search in question in the assessee and M/s. SRS Group on 06.06.2018 wherein he was found to have 2 | P a g e a beneficiary of a very well-orchestrated network of running various shell companies having received accommodation entries routed through them. We further make it clear that both these impugned assessment years as on the date of search on 06.06.2018 are not “unablated” ones wherein any addition had to be made based on the specific issues material only in light of PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC). There is further not denial to the fact that the impugned additions had been made based on the learned Assessing Officer’s identical detailed discussion in his corresponding assessments elaborating the entire factual matrix at length. We thus see no merit in the assessee’s instant first and foremost substantive ground challenging validity of the impugned assessments.
Next comes the second issue between the parties regarding correctness of section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE additions involving varying sums. Learned CIT(DR) very fairly invites our attention to the assessment discussion once again indicating the assessee as the beneficiary of various unexplained cash credit entries by taking help of shell entities network. We thus find no merit in the 3 | P a g e assessee’s instance identical substantive grounds in both these assessment years which stand rejected in principle.
The assessee next substantive ground pleads that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in disallowing his loss from house property claim of Rs.2 lakhs representing interest paid on housing loans. We are of the considered view that the same requires learned Assessing Officer’s afresh factual verification than substantive adjudication on our part at this stage. We thus restore this identical substantive ground back to the learned Assessing Officer for his afresh factual verification subject to a rider that the assessee shall plead and prove all the relevant facts in three effective opportunities it has own risk and responsibility.
Lastly comes yet another issue of the validity of the impugned assessments for want of a proper section 153D approval. We make it clear that the assessee has nowhere filed a copy of such an approval till date. Rejected in very terms therefore.
We make it clear before parting that as far as assessee’s assessment under section 115BBE is concerned, we quote S.M.I.L.E. Microfinance Ltd. Vs. ACIT, W.P. (MD) No.2078 of 2020 4 | P a g e & 1742 of 2020, dated 19.11.2024 (Madras) that the impugned statutory provision would come into effect on the transaction done on or after 01.04.2017 only. Learned Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to compute his assessee’s consequential income in very terms in the former assessment year 2017-18.