Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer made additions under Section 56 of the Act for Assessment Year 2004-05 based on a search action. Similar additions were made for subsequent assessment years. The assessees argued that no seized or incriminating material was found to justify these additions.
Held
The Tribunal held that for an unabated assessment, additions must be based on incriminating materials as per the PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. case. Since the Assessing Officer made additions without seized/incriminating material, the assessments were quashed.
Key Issues
Whether additions made by the Assessing Officer without relying on seized or incriminating material are valid in an unabated assessment.
Sections Cited
56
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
The instant batch of eight cases pertains to three assessees herein, namely, Shri Saurabh Garg ,Smt. Sheela Devi Garg and M/s.
K.S. Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. All other relevant details thereof are tabulated as under:
Sl. Appeal/CO No. Appellant Respondent Order Appealed against No. 1. 362/Agr/2017 & ACIT, Circle-2, Sh. SaurabhGarg CIT(Appeals), Gwalior’s order in Appeal A.Y. 2004-05 Gwalior. No. 786/IT/2011-12/Gwl dated 2. CO No. 34/Agr/18 Sh. ACIT, Circle-2, 05.06.2017, involving proceedings under A.Y. 2004-05 SaurabhGarg Gwalior. section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A
26/Agr/2014 ACIT, Circle-2, Smt. Sheela Devi CIT(Appeals), Gwalior’s order in Appeal A.Y. 2005-06 Gwalior. Garg No. 752/IT/2011-12/Gwl dated 13.11.2013, involving proceedings under 4. CO No. 03/Agr/16 Smt. Sheela ACIT, Circle-2, section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A A.Y. 2005-06 Devi Garg Gwalior. 5. 28/Agr/2014 ACIT, Circle-2, Smt. Sheela Devi CIT(Appeals), Gwalior’s order in Appeal A.Y. 2008-09 Gwalior. Garg No. 750/IT/2011-12/Gwl dated 13.11.2013, involving proceedings under 6. CO No. 04/Agr/16 Smt. Sheela ACIT, Circle-2, section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A A.Y. 2008-09 Devi Garg Gwalior. 7. 52/Agr/2014 ACIT, Circle-2, K.S. Real Estate CIT(Appeals), Gwalior’s order in Appeal A.Y. 2008-09 Gwalior. Pvt. Ltd. No. 476/IT/2011-12/Gwl dated 12.12.2013, involving proceedings under 8. CO No. 05/Agr/16 K.S. Real Estate ACIT, Circle-2, section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A A.Y. 2008-09 Pvt. Ltd. Gwalior.
Heard both the parties. Case files perused. Shri S.K. Jain, learned CIT(DR) has filed an adjournment letter stating that since unprecedented number of cases are fixed for hearing, he is unable to assist the Bench.
We make it clear that since, all these cases are old appeals filed way back in the year 2014, 2016 and 2018, as the case may be, we see no merit in the aforesaid adjournment petition. The same stands rejected.
3. We now proceed assessment year wise for the sake of convenience and brevity.
The first and foremost assessment year is 2004-05 herein involves the Revenue’s appeal No. 362/Agr/2017 in case of Shri SaurabhGarg along with his cross objection C.O. No. 05/Agr/2018 therein. A perusal of the assessment order dated 14.12.2011 passed by the learned Assessing Officer indicates that he had in fact made addition u/s. 56 of the Act amounting to Rs.2,10,90,000/- as unexplained, in furtherance to 3 | P a g e the search action dated 11.03.2011, conducted by the departmental authorities at assessee’s residential premises. It further emerges that the assessment for assessment year 2004-05 is an “unabated” one wherein, any addition has to be made going by incriminating materials only as per PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. [2023] 149 taxman.com 399 (SC).
Learned Assessing Officer had not made his addition based on any seized/incriminating material. We, therefore, quash the impugned assessment itself in these facts and circumstances. Thus, . Revenue’s fails and assessee’s cross objection succeeds in very terms.
Next comes assessment year 2005-06 involving the Revenue’s Sheela Devi Garg. Learned lower authorities had not made any addition based on the seized/incriminating material found in search. We adopt the preceding analogy herein as well to decline Revenue’s appeal and the assessee’s cross objection No. 03/Agr/2016 is accepted, in very terms.
Next assessment year A.Y. 2008-09 involves Revenue’s appeal and C.O. No. 04/Agr/2016 in case of Smt. Sheela with the assessee’s C.O. No. 05/Agr/2016 in case of M/s. K.S. Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., respectively. The 4 | P a g e assessment orders in these cases also nowhere indicate that the learned lower authorities had made additions based on any seized/ incriminating material found in the search. We accordingly quash the impugned corresponding assessments in very terms. These Revenue’s appeals and 52/Agr/2014 are dismissed and assessees’ cross objections Nos. 04/Agr/2016 & 05/Agr/2016 succeed.
To sum up, these Revenue’s appeals 26 & 28/Agr/2014 and 52/Agr/2014 are dismissed and the assessees’ cross objections Nos. 34/Agr/2018, 03 & 04/Agr/2016 and 05/Agr/2016 are allowed, in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 11TH February, 2025.