2016 (1) TMI 1450 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 153A - addition on account of low household withdrawals - HELD THAT - As can be seen from the order of AO, and CIT(A), they only disbelieved assessee's version. Since this issue does not arise out of any incriminating material and as assessee has shown the amount as a receipt in 2002-03 itself in the capital account, we are of the opinion that addition cannot be made in the proceedings U/s. 153C, without any evidence to contrary to disbelieve assessee's contentions. We have already held that initiation of proceedings U/s. 153C are itself bad in law, these issues become academic in nature. Assessee relied on coordinate bench decision in the case of Vinod Kumar Agarwal, another assessee's group case. Therein assessments were made U/s. 153A and parameters for considering the jurisdiction are different. In this case we have already examined the proceedings in the light of jurisdiction high Court judgment. Following the same, the proceedings U/s. 153C initiated in this assessee's case cannot be sustained. Accordingly, assessee's contentions are accepted. The impugned orders are accordingly set aside.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of addition made by the AO on account of low household withdrawals.
2. Requirement of incriminating material for additions under Section 153A/153C.
3. Adequacy of household withdrawals considering the standard of living.
4. Satisfaction of AO for initiating proceedings under Section 153C.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Addition on Account of Low Household Withdrawals:
The AO made an addition of Rs. 30,000 to the assessee's income for the AY 2007-08 due to low household withdrawals. The assessee argued that he was living with his two sons who also contributed to household expenses, making the withdrawals adequate. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, referencing a similar case (Anil Agarwal, ITA No. 0457/2009-10). The ITAT, however, found that the addition was made on assumptions and without concrete evidence, thus directing the AO to delete the addition.

2. Requirement of Incriminating Material for Additions Under Section 153A/153C:
The ITAT emphasized that for any addition under Section 153A/153C, there must be incriminating material found during the search. The AO failed to provide specific incriminating material linked to the assessee. The ITAT referred to the decision in the case of Anil Kumar Agarwal and Chanderpal Agarwal, which highlighted the necessity of recording satisfaction and the presence of incriminating material for initiating proceedings under Section 153C.

3. Adequacy of Household Withdrawals Considering the Standard of Living:
The assessee contended that the household withdrawals were adequate given his living arrangements with his sons. The ITAT noted that the AO's addition was based on random calculations without inquiry into the standard of living. The Tribunal found no justification for the addition on the basis of low withdrawals, deeming it unsustainable.

4. Satisfaction of AO for Initiating Proceedings Under Section 153C:
The ITAT scrutinized whether the AO recorded the necessary satisfaction for initiating proceedings under Section 153C. It was found that the AO did not record specific satisfaction or link the seized material to the assessee's income. The Tribunal referenced the AP High Court's ruling in CIT Vs. Shettys Pharmaceuticals & Biologicals Ltd., which mandates explicit satisfaction by the AO. The absence of such satisfaction rendered the initiation of proceedings under Section 153C invalid.

Conclusion:
The ITAT allowed the appeal, directing the deletion of the Rs. 30,000 addition made for low household withdrawals. The Tribunal underscored the necessity of incriminating material and proper satisfaction for additions under Section 153A/153C, aligning with the principles laid down by higher judicial authorities.