2018 (1) TMI 391 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of assessment u/s 153A - addition u/s 68 - Held that - In the present case, is an admitted fact that no recovery has been made from the possession of the assessee-company. The department s belief is that some material found during the course of search in Aryan Sainik Group of cases. The A.O. on examining the books of account of the assessee-company found that assessee has received share application money of ₹ 1.25 crores in assessment year under appeal which were already disclosed to the Revenue Department prior to the date of search. Therefore, its books of account could not be treated as incriminating material against the assessee-company. No evidence was found during the course of search that any money (cash credit) belongs to the assessee- company. No evidence was found during the course of search or otherwise to prove that assessee-company has received any accommodation entry. The A.O. has not referred to any seized document or material in the assessment order on the basis of which, addition on merit have been made. Therefore, the conditions of Section 153C are not satisfied in this case. Therefore, there were no justification for the A.O. to make addition of ₹ 1.25 crores against the assessee in proceeding under section 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961. We, accordingly, set aside the orders of the authorities below and quash the proceedings under section 153C of the I.T. Act. Since, we quash the proceedings under section 153C of the Act, therefore, there is no need to decide the addition on merit - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of proceedings under Section 153C of the I.T. Act.
2. Deletion of addition of ?1.25 crores under Section 68 of the I.T. Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality of Proceedings under Section 153C of the I.T. Act:

The primary issue was whether the proceedings initiated under Section 153C of the I.T. Act were legally valid. The search and seizure operations were conducted on the Aryan Sainik Group, and the assessee-company was not directly subjected to the search. The A.O. initiated proceedings under Section 153C based on the search in the Aryan Sainik Group cases.

The Tribunal analyzed Section 153C, which requires that the seized money, bullion, documents, etc., must belong to a person other than the one referred to in Section 153A. The Tribunal emphasized that if this condition is not met, no proceedings could be taken under Section 153C. It was noted that no incriminating material or documents were found during the search that belonged to the assessee-company. The Tribunal referred to several judicial precedents, including the Hon’ble Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs. Sinhgad Technical Education Society and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court's decision in Vijaybhai N. Chandrani vs. ACIT, which underscored the necessity of satisfying the conditions of Section 153C before initiating proceedings.

The Tribunal concluded that since no incriminating material was found during the search that belonged to the assessee-company, the conditions of Section 153C were not satisfied. Therefore, the initiation of proceedings under Section 153C was deemed invalid. The Tribunal quashed the proceedings under Section 153C of the I.T. Act.

2. Deletion of Addition of ?1.25 Crores under Section 68 of the I.T. Act:

The A.O. had made an addition of ?1.25 crores on account of unexplained share application money, treating it as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the I.T. Act. The assessee challenged this addition before the Ld. CIT(A), who deleted the addition after finding that the assessee had proved the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the share applicants by submitting their name, address, PAN, bank statements, balance confirmations, and ITR/acknowledgments.

The Revenue appealed against this deletion, while the assessee supported the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and raised an additional ground that no incriminating material was found during the search to warrant such an addition.

The Tribunal observed that the A.O. had not referred to any seized document or material in the assessment order on the basis of which the addition was made. The Tribunal reiterated that since the proceedings under Section 153C were quashed, there was no need to decide the addition on merit, which had already been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A).

Conclusion:

The Tribunal allowed the cross objection of the assessee and dismissed the Departmental appeal. The proceedings under Section 153C were quashed due to the lack of incriminating material found during the search that belonged to the assessee-company. Consequently, the addition of ?1.25 crores under Section 68 was not warranted.