9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (4) TMI 39 - AT - Income TaxAssessment order u/s 153A - Addition u/s 68 of the Act as income from undisclosed sources - HELD THAT - We find material substance in the submissions advanced on behalf of the assessee / appellant and having thoughtful consideration that addition in question deserves to the deleted AS completed assessment can be interfered by the Ld. AO while making the assessment u/s 153(A) of the Act only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search as relying Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. 2023 (4) TMI 1056 - SUPREME COURT - Appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed
ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The appeal raised several core legal issues:
ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS 1. Validity of Assessment Order Without DIN The legal framework requires a Document Identification Number (DIN) for all communications issued by the tax authorities, as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019. The Tribunal considered whether the absence of a DIN rendered the assessment order invalid. The Tribunal noted the procedural requirement but focused on the substantive compliance with tax laws. 2. Legality of Search and Assessment Under Section 153A The Tribunal analyzed the legal provisions under Section 153A, which allows assessment following a search. The appellant argued the search was unlawful, thus invalidating subsequent proceedings. The Tribunal examined precedents, notably the Delhi High Court's decision in CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, which limits reassessment under Section 153A to cases with incriminating evidence found during the search. 3. Jurisdiction and Compliance with Section 153D The Tribunal reviewed whether the assessing officer had valid jurisdiction and whether the mandatory approval under Section 153D was obtained. The Tribunal found procedural compliance lacking, particularly in the absence of incriminating material justifying the assessment. 4. Incriminating Material and Additions Under Section 68 The Tribunal scrutinized the addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- under Section 68, which pertains to unexplained cash credits. The Tribunal found no incriminating material was discovered during the search to justify the addition. The Tribunal relied on the remand report and additional evidence confirming the genuineness of transactions, aligning with precedents set by the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court in PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. 5. Procedural Fairness and Opportunity to Rebut The Tribunal assessed whether the assessee was denied an opportunity to challenge the evidence used in the assessment. It emphasized the principle of natural justice, finding the assessee was not adequately informed or allowed to contest the evidence, violating procedural fairness. 6. Issuance of Notices and Limitation Periods The Tribunal examined the legality of notices issued under Sections 142(1) and 143(2), focusing on whether they were time-barred. The Tribunal found procedural irregularities in the issuance of notices, impacting the validity of the assessment. 7. Interest and Tax Liability Under Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 115BBE The Tribunal considered the appropriateness of interest and tax liability determinations. It found the calculations aligned with statutory provisions but were contingent on the validity of the underlying assessment, which was disputed. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS The Tribunal concluded that the assessment under Section 153A was invalid due to the absence of incriminating material, procedural lapses, and failure to adhere to statutory requirements. Key principles established include:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the deletion of the addition and invalidating the assessment order, reinforcing the principle that assessments under Section 153A require substantive incriminating evidence discovered during a search.
|
