ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2) , NAGPUR vs. M/S RASOYA PROTEINS LTD , NAGPUR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK RIPOTE
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M.:
These Revenue’s twin appeals, for assessment years
2007-2008 & 2008-2009, arise against the CIT(A)-3, Nagpur’s
as many separate orders nos.CIT(A)-3/13 & 14/2016-17, both
dated 29.12.2017, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) r.w.s.
153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”);
respectively.
None appeared for assessee despite service of notice.
It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
2 I.T.A.Nos.37 & 38/NAG./2018
We find with the able assistance coming from the
Revenue side that it’s identical former substantive grievance in
both these cases is legal in nature wherein it seeks to reverse
the CIT(A)'s findings holding these twin assessments as not
sustainable in law for want of the corresponding incriminating
material found and seized during the course of the search
action herein dated 08.08.2012.
We wish to make it clear that both these are
“unabated” assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 as on the
date of the search wherein the assessee had duly filed it’s
sec.139(1) returns followed by the processing thereof
u/sec.143(1) of the Act. This is indeed coupled with the fact
that all what the learned Assessing Officer had done in both
these cases was to enhance the assessee’s income treating it’s
book results as an instance of decline in yield of refined oil.
Meaning thereby that he had gone by the assessee’s regular
book results only than making any addition based on the
relevant incriminating material seized during the course of
search. This clinching factual position has gone un-rebutted
from the Revenue side during the course of hearing before us.
We find in this factual backdrop that hon’ble apex
court’s recent landmark decision in PCIT vs., Abhisar
Buildwell P. Ltd., [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) has
already settled the very issue in assessee’s favour and against
3 I.T.A.Nos.37 & 38/NAG./2018
the department that any addition made in the course of an
‘unabated assessment’ framed u/sec.153A has to be based on
the seized material only. We reject the Revenue’s instant twin
appeals on this legal issue itself therefore. Ordered
accordingly.
All other Revenue’s pleadings on merits stand
rendered academic.
These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA.Nos.37 & 38/Nag./
2018 are dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.09.2023.
Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Pune, Dated 28th September, 2023
VBP/-
Copy to
The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A)-3, Nagpur. 4. The CIT (Central), Nagpur 5. D.R. ITAT, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. 6. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy //
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.
4 I.T.A.Nos.37 & 38/NAG./2018
S.No. Details Date 1 Draft dictated on 27.09.2023 Sr.PS 2 Draft placed before author 27.09.2023 Sr.PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Author .09.2023 J.M. 4 .09.2023 A.M. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS .09.2023 Sr.PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on .09.2023 Sr.PS 7 Date of uploading of Order .09.2023 Sr.PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk .09.2023 Sr.PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order
