2021 (4) TMI 786 - HC - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 153A - search in the premises of the assessee as well under Section 132 of the Act - Application u/s 154 - Assessee submitted that the tribunal did not adjudicate the controversy involved in the appeal on merits - It is also urged that an opportunity should be given to the assessee for submitting the documents to show that addition could not be made in the hands of the assessee. - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that subsequently, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has allowed the petition filed by the assessee under Section 154 of the Act and has granted the relief to the assessee. From the relevant extract of para 19 of the order of the tribunal it is evident that despite opportunity being available to the assessee before the tribunal, the as. Has not produced any material before the tribunal. Apart from this, in the fact situation of the case, in our considered opinion, the relief has already been granted to the assessee in proceedings under Section 154 of the Act, therefore, the challenge to the impugned order has been rendered academic. It is therefore not necessary for us to adjudicate the validity of the order dated 14.07.2017 passed by the tribunal and to answer the substantial questions of law.

Issues:
1. Assessment under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without related material found during search
2. Sustainability of addition under Section 69 of the Act without contrary material
3. Violation of principles of natural justice in appellate orders

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the assessment under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment year 2009-10. The primary issue was whether the assessment was sustainable when no material related to the impugned addition was found during the search conducted under Section 132 of the Act. The substantial question of law raised was regarding the validity of the assessment under Section 153A in the absence of specific material related to the addition made.

2. Another significant issue was the sustainability of the addition under Section 69 of the Act in the hands of the appellant. The question arose as to whether the addition could be justified solely based on contemporary materials showing investment by another party associated with the appellant, especially when there was no contrary material supporting the Revenue's case. The tribunal considered this aspect while evaluating the grounds of appeal and the conduct of the appellant in responding to notices and submissions during the proceedings.

3. The appellant also raised concerns regarding the violation of principles of natural justice in the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal. The appellant contended that there was a gross violation of natural justice as they were not provided with the opportunity to make submissions against the impugned addition on merits. The Tribunal, in its order, addressed the appellant's conduct in responding to notices and the grounds presented, concluding that the appellant failed to establish a violation of natural justice principles.

4. The facts leading to the appeal involved the appellant operating horses under Bangalore Turf Club and engaging in transactions with a participant, resulting in a Memorandum of Understanding. Following a search proceeding, the Assessing Officer made an addition towards unexplained investment in a property, leading to the determination of the total income. Subsequent appeals were filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, with the appellant seeking relief under Section 154 of the Act.

5. The Tribunal's order highlighted the appellant's conduct in the proceedings, including avoiding service of notices and failing to produce material before the Tribunal. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appellant's petition under Section 154, granting relief. The Court considered the subsequent relief granted to the appellant and deemed the challenge to the Tribunal's order as academic, leading to the disposal of the appeal without adjudicating on the validity of the Tribunal's order or the substantial questions of law raised.

6. In conclusion, the Court disposed of the appeal as academic, clarifying that the observations made in the order would not impact other pending proceedings. The decision emphasized the relief granted to the appellant under Section 154 and the lack of necessity to address the validity of the Tribunal's order or the substantial legal questions raised during the appeal process.

← Previous Next →