ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT

M/S. Sir Shadi Lal Enterprises Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2005-06

…hed person. At this stage, we may point out that nowhere the Assessing Officer has mentioned that neither Shri R.K. Miglani nor the UPDA have disclaimed the seized documents. 23. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of ARN Infrastructure India Limited 394 ITR 569 had the occasion to consider the following facts: “A search was conducted in the case of a company E and when the panchnama for the search was prepared, the name of the company R was also added to it. During the course of search, a letter written by the assessee to the company R was found, which contained the details of commission payments by th…

National Industrial Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2005-06

…hed person. At this stage, we may point out that nowhere the Assessing Officer has mentioned that neither Shri R.K. Miglani nor the UPDA have disclaimed the seized documents. 23. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of ARN Infrastructure India Limited 394 ITR 569 had the occasion to consider the following facts: “A search was conducted in the case of a company E and when the panchnama for the search was prepared, the name of the company R was also added to it. During the course of search, a letter written by the assessee to the company R was found, which contained the details of commission payments by th…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. National Industrial Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2005-06

…hed person. At this stage, we may point out that nowhere the Assessing Officer has mentioned that neither Shri R.K. Miglani nor the UPDA have disclaimed the seized documents. 23. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of ARN Infrastructure India Limited 394 ITR 569 had the occasion to consider the following facts: “A search was conducted in the case of a company E and when the panchnama for the search was prepared, the name of the company R was also added to it. During the course of search, a letter written by the assessee to the company R was found, which contained the details of commission payments by th…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. National Industrial Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2005-06

…hed person. At this stage, we may point out that nowhere the Assessing Officer has mentioned that neither Shri R.K. Miglani nor the UPDA have disclaimed the seized documents. 23. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of ARN Infrastructure India Limited 394 ITR 569 had the occasion to consider the following facts: “A search was conducted in the case of a company E and when the panchnama for the search was prepared, the name of the company R was also added to it. During the course of search, a letter written by the assessee to the company R was found, which contained the details of commission payments by th…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. National Industrial Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2003-04 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Assessment Year: 2005-06

…hed person. At this stage, we may point out that nowhere the Assessing Officer has mentioned that neither Shri R.K. Miglani nor the UPDA have disclaimed the seized documents. 23. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of ARN Infrastructure India Limited 394 ITR 569 had the occasion to consider the following facts: “A search was conducted in the case of a company E and when the panchnama for the search was prepared, the name of the company R was also added to it. During the course of search, a letter written by the assessee to the company R was found, which contained the details of commission payments by th…

M/S Mascot Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Mascot Buildwell Pvt. Vs. Acit, Ltd., Cent. Circle -14, New Delhi B-49, Lgf, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan :Aaecm7631E (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ding over of assets/documents to the AO of the Assessee." 9. The said decision in RRJ Securities (supra) has been followed by this Court subsequently in ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circule-28, New Delhi[2017] 394 ITR 569 (Del.). 10. Mr. Salil Aggarwal, learned counsel for the Assessee, has drawn the attention of the Court to the recent amendment made in Section 153 C of the Act by the Finance Act, 2017 with effect from 1st April 2017. This amendment in effect states that the block period for the searched person as well as the 'other person' would be the same six…

M/S. Dalmia Consolidated Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri T.S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2008-09

…be reopened, the decision of the Supreme Court in Sinhgad Technical Education Society (supra) settles the issue and holds this to be an essential requirement. The decisions of this Court in RRJ Securities and ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2017] 394 ITR 569/81 taxmann.com 260 (Delhi) also hold that in order to justify the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153C of the Act the documents seized must be incriminating and must relate to each of the AYs whose assessments are sought to be reopened. Since the satisfaction note forms the basis for initiating the proceedings under Section 153C of the A…

M/S. Green Range Farms Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2010-11 Green Range Farms Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Central Circle- 17, A- 35, Brij Green Farms, New Delhi. Chattarpur, Mandir Road, Vs. Village- Satbari, New Delhi.

…s held that by their Lordships by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sinhgad Technical Education Society (supra) as well as their own decision in the case of RRJ Securities (supra) and ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. vs. CIT, 394 ITR 569 that in order to justify the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C of the Act, the documents seized must be incriminating. In the said case, it was contended like in the present case on behalf of the Revenue that the requirement of having incriminating material found during the course of search was to be met only during the assessment and not for…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 vs. Saldi Chits Pvt. Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

…er the records furnished by the assessee and which was not controverted by the Ld. DR, therefore no addition u/s 68 could have been made……..” The ITAT also relied upon the judgment of this Court in ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (2017) 394 ITR 569, wherein, it was held that if documents seized from a third party do not show nexus with any omission or concealed, income tax addition cannot be sustained under Section 153C of the Act. Since the ITAT is the final fact finding authority and had gone into the evidence and applied the rules enunciated by this Court’s ITA 142/2018…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 vs. Saldi Chits Pvt. Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

…er the records furnished by the assessee and which was not controverted by the Ld. DR, therefore no addition u/s 68 could have been made……..” The ITAT also relied upon the judgment of this Court in ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (2017) 394 ITR 569, wherein, it was held that if documents seized from a third party do not show nexus with any omission or concealed, income tax addition cannot be sustained under Section 153C of the Act. Since the ITAT is the final fact finding authority and had gone into the evidence and applied the rules enunciated by this Court’s ITA 142/2018…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 vs. Saldi Chits Pvt. Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

…er the records furnished by the assessee and which was not controverted by the Ld. DR, therefore no addition u/s 68 could have been made……..” The ITAT also relied upon the judgment of this Court in ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (2017) 394 ITR 569, wherein, it was held that if documents seized from a third party do not show nexus with any omission or concealed, income tax addition cannot be sustained under Section 153C of the Act. Since the ITAT is the final fact finding authority and had gone into the evidence and applied the rules enunciated by this Court’s ITA 142/2018…