CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.

Yogesh Mehra, Mumbai vs. DCIT, C.C.-3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2008-09

…is unabated on the date of search, no addition can be made without incriminating seized materials. The case of the assessee is covered by the following decisions: 7 Shri Yogesh Mehra a) In CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2016) 374 ITR 645 (Bom)(HC) wherein it was held that no addition can be made in respect of assessments which have become final if no incriminating material is found during search. b) In CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa [2017] 79 taxmann.com 398 (Bom) where it was held that where no incriminating material was found during course of the search, entire proceedings under s…

Jagdishkumar Madanlal Gupta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 5(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

…fense of his arguments and pleas the ld AR relied heavily on the following decisions: 1. All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. v. DCIT [2012] 18 ITR(T) 106 (Mum) (SB) CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava 2. Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78/ (2016) 374 ITR 645 (Bom)(HC) PCIT v. Gahoi Foods (P.) Ltd. [2020] 117 taxmann.com 3. 118 (SC) CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwal [2017] 86 taxmann.com 3 4. (Bom)(HC) CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa [2017] 79 taxmann.com 5. 398 (Bom)(HC Mr. Jagdishkumar Madanlal Gupta & ors 6. M/s. Ideal Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT ITA 173- 77/M/2015 dated December 31, 2015 7. PCIT v. Sun…

Amit H Patel (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC 3((4), Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

…fully following the decision of the co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal which has been passed after Amit H. Patel (HUF) following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom) and various other decisions, hold that the addition made by the AO under section 68 & 69 are without jurisdiction and are directed to be deleted on the jurisdictional issue. 11. The issues raised in ground No.2 ,3 and 4 are on merit challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs. 10,43,74,444/- by Ld. CIT(A) as made by t…

Sunil Chimanlal Gandhi, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-8(3) (Erstwhile ACIT CC-46), Mumbai

In the result, all these penalty appeals u/s

…ld. AR on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573 and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Wareshousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) reported in 374 ITR 645. The ld. AR also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd reported in 397 ITR 82 to drive home the point that statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act does not by themselves constitute incriminating material. Hence, the argument advanced by the ld. DR in this rega…

Jayesh Shantilal Vira, Mumbai vs. ACIT-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the three assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

…, therefore, respectfully following the decision of the co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal which has been passed after following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom) and various other decisions, hold that the addition made by the AO under section 68 & 69 are without jurisdiction and are directed to be deleted on the jurisdictional issue. 9. The issues raised in ground No.3 & 4 are on merit challenging the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs.3,80,08,867/- by Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO un…

M/S vs. S Metal P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Years: 2014-15

…unabated assessment which has attained finality on the date of search and therefore no addition could be made in absence of any incriminating material or evidence as has been held by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd (374 ITR 645)(Bom). This fact is also discussed ,corroborated and proved during the assessment proceedings u/s 153A of the Act and the only addition made was on account of disallowance under section 14A of the Act. When DR was specifically asked as to how the action of the PCIT is justified, the ld DR simply relied on the order passed u/s 263 of the Act. Thus…

M/S Sinnar Thermal Power Ltd(Formerly Rattanindia Nasik Power Ltd), Delhi vs. Dy CIT CC 6 (4), Mumbai

…o determine the total income , irrespective of existence of any incriminating material found during the course of search.We find that the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Continental Warehousing (Corporation) Nhava Sheva Ltd reported in 374 ITR 645 (Bom) on the impugned issue before us, had held as under:- M/s. Sinnar Thermal Power Limited (Formerly Rattanindia Nasik Power Limited) 29. We are not in agreement with Mr. Pinto that these observations are made in passing or that they are not binding on us because the essential controversy before the Bench was somewhat different. He urges that…

Jay Ketan Parikh, Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

…ddition can be made in absence of any incriminating materials in the unabated assessment year. In defense of his arguments the ld counsel of the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay high court in the case of CIT v. All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd (374 ITR 645) wherein it has been held that, in respect of unabated years, no addition can be made if no incriminating material is found during the course of search. The ld AR prays that in view of the above, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by CIT(A) in respect of the impugned year which is a unabated year is bad in law and may be delete…

Mr. Anil Agrawal (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(4), Mumbai

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.5512-5516/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2014-15) Mr. Anil Agrawal (Huf) Dcit-Central Circle-3(4) Room No.1915, 19Th Floor बिाम/ 2401-2402, Anmol Pride Off. Patel Auto, S.V. Road, Air India Building, Nariman Point Vs. Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400 062. Mumbai-400 021. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacha-9591-E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Harit-Ld. Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Shri Aakash Kumar-Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 12/01/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 05/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11 To 2014-15 Contest Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. However, Facts & Issues Are More Or Less Similar. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Now Being Disposed-Off By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. It Is Admitted Position That Adjudication In Any Year Would Substantially Apply To All The Other Years Also.

…to incriminating material found during search action has been expounded by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava 37 M/s Anil Agrawal (HUF) ITA Nos. 5512-5516/Mum/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2014-15 Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645. The ratio of this decision has recently been applied by coordinate bench, on similar facts and circumstances, in the group case of Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia V/s DCIT & ors. (ITA No.6519/Mum/2019 & ors) order dated 31/12/2020. In this decision, the coordinate bench, referring to another decision of Tribunal in Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal Vs…

Mr. Anil Agrawal (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(4), Mumbai

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.5512-5516/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2014-15) Mr. Anil Agrawal (Huf) Dcit-Central Circle-3(4) Room No.1915, 19Th Floor बिाम/ 2401-2402, Anmol Pride Off. Patel Auto, S.V. Road, Air India Building, Nariman Point Vs. Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400 062. Mumbai-400 021. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacha-9591-E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Harit-Ld. Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Shri Aakash Kumar-Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 12/01/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 05/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11 To 2014-15 Contest Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. However, Facts & Issues Are More Or Less Similar. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Now Being Disposed-Off By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. It Is Admitted Position That Adjudication In Any Year Would Substantially Apply To All The Other Years Also.

…to incriminating material found during search action has been expounded by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava 37 M/s Anil Agrawal (HUF) ITA Nos. 5512-5516/Mum/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2014-15 Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645. The ratio of this decision has recently been applied by coordinate bench, on similar facts and circumstances, in the group case of Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia V/s DCIT & ors. (ITA No.6519/Mum/2019 & ors) order dated 31/12/2020. In this decision, the coordinate bench, referring to another decision of Tribunal in Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal Vs…

Mr. Anil Agrawal (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(4), Mumbai

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.5512-5516/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2014-15) Mr. Anil Agrawal (Huf) Dcit-Central Circle-3(4) Room No.1915, 19Th Floor बिाम/ 2401-2402, Anmol Pride Off. Patel Auto, S.V. Road, Air India Building, Nariman Point Vs. Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400 062. Mumbai-400 021. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacha-9591-E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Harit-Ld. Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Shri Aakash Kumar-Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 12/01/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 05/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11 To 2014-15 Contest Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. However, Facts & Issues Are More Or Less Similar. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Now Being Disposed-Off By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. It Is Admitted Position That Adjudication In Any Year Would Substantially Apply To All The Other Years Also.

…to incriminating material found during search action has been expounded by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava 37 M/s Anil Agrawal (HUF) ITA Nos. 5512-5516/Mum/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2014-15 Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645. The ratio of this decision has recently been applied by coordinate bench, on similar facts and circumstances, in the group case of Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia V/s DCIT & ors. (ITA No.6519/Mum/2019 & ors) order dated 31/12/2020. In this decision, the coordinate bench, referring to another decision of Tribunal in Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal Vs…

Mr. Anil Agrawal (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(4), Mumbai

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.5512-5516/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2014-15) Mr. Anil Agrawal (Huf) Dcit-Central Circle-3(4) Room No.1915, 19Th Floor बिाम/ 2401-2402, Anmol Pride Off. Patel Auto, S.V. Road, Air India Building, Nariman Point Vs. Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400 062. Mumbai-400 021. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacha-9591-E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Harit-Ld. Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Shri Aakash Kumar-Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 12/01/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 05/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11 To 2014-15 Contest Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. However, Facts & Issues Are More Or Less Similar. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Now Being Disposed-Off By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. It Is Admitted Position That Adjudication In Any Year Would Substantially Apply To All The Other Years Also.

…to incriminating material found during search action has been expounded by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava 37 M/s Anil Agrawal (HUF) ITA Nos. 5512-5516/Mum/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2014-15 Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645. The ratio of this decision has recently been applied by coordinate bench, on similar facts and circumstances, in the group case of Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia V/s DCIT & ors. (ITA No.6519/Mum/2019 & ors) order dated 31/12/2020. In this decision, the coordinate bench, referring to another decision of Tribunal in Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal Vs…

Mr. Anil Agrawal (HUF), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3(4), Mumbai

The appeals stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.5512-5516/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2014-15) Mr. Anil Agrawal (Huf) Dcit-Central Circle-3(4) Room No.1915, 19Th Floor बिाम/ 2401-2402, Anmol Pride Off. Patel Auto, S.V. Road, Air India Building, Nariman Point Vs. Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400 062. Mumbai-400 021. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacha-9591-E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Harit-Ld. Cit-Dr Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Shri Aakash Kumar-Ld. Ars सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 12/01/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 05/04/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench 1.1 Aforesaid Appeals By Assessee For Assessment Years (Ay) 2010-11 To 2014-15 Contest Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. However, Facts & Issues Are More Or Less Similar. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Now Being Disposed-Off By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. It Is Admitted Position That Adjudication In Any Year Would Substantially Apply To All The Other Years Also.

…to incriminating material found during search action has been expounded by Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava 37 M/s Anil Agrawal (HUF) ITA Nos. 5512-5516/Mum/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2014-15 Sheva) Ltd. 374 ITR 645. The ratio of this decision has recently been applied by coordinate bench, on similar facts and circumstances, in the group case of Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia V/s DCIT & ors. (ITA No.6519/Mum/2019 & ors) order dated 31/12/2020. In this decision, the coordinate bench, referring to another decision of Tribunal in Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal Vs…