2015 (11) TMI 1060 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of assessment u/s. 153A - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - CIT(A) has rightly held that in the absence of any material found during the search, as a result, no disallowance / additions can be made in the assessment u/s. 153A of the I.T. Act. Even otherwise, we find force in the Ld. Counsel s submissions that the issue in dispute is also covered by the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT(Central)-III vs. Kabul Chawla 2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT wherein held that if the additions are made, but not based on any incriminating material found during search operation, then these additions were not sustainable in the eyes of law. In our considered opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly adjudicated the issue in dispute and accordingly rightly deleted the additions in dispute. - Decided in favour of assessee.

2015 (9) TMI 80 - HC

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition on account of unexplained investment in office flat.
2. Deletion of disallowance of medical allowances under Section 40A(3).
3. Deletion of disallowance of conveyance expenses.
4. Deletion of disallowance of traveling expenses.
5. Deletion of disallowance of miscellaneous expenses.
6. Deletion of disallowance of telephone and telex expenses.
7. Deletion of disallowance of vehicle running and maintenance expenses.
8. Deletion of disallowance of vehicle depreciation expenses.
9. Legal validity of disallowances not based on incriminating material found during search under Section 153A.
10. Overall correctness of the CIT(A)'s order.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition on Account of Unexplained Investment in Office Flat:
The CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 14,98,653/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of unexplained investment in an office flat. The CIT(A) observed that the AO's disallowance was not based on any incriminating material found during the search. The CIT(A) further noted that the investment was explained through transfer entries from factory building and advance for flat accounts, which were accepted by the AO when computing depreciation and loss on sale of the flat.

2. Deletion of Disallowance of Medical Allowances under Section 40A(3):
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 4,400/- made by the AO under Section 40A(3) related to medical allowances. The CIT(A) noted that the AO did not provide any specific basis for this disallowance and that the expenses were supported by necessary bills and vouchers.

3. Deletion of Disallowance of Conveyance Expenses:
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 36,200/- made by the AO out of conveyance expenses. The CIT(A) found that the AO's disallowance was not based on any specific instance or material found during the search and was therefore considered adhoc in nature.

4. Deletion of Disallowance of Traveling Expenses:
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 50,611/- made by the AO out of traveling expenses. The CIT(A) noted that the expenses were supported by necessary documentation and that the AO did not provide any specific basis for the disallowance.

5. Deletion of Disallowance of Miscellaneous Expenses:
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 15,250/- made by the AO out of miscellaneous expenses. The CIT(A) observed that the AO did not provide any specific basis or instance for the disallowance and that the expenses were supported by necessary documentation.

6. Deletion of Disallowance of Telephone and Telex Expenses:
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 19,100/- made by the AO out of telephone and telex expenses. The CIT(A) noted that the AO's disallowance was not based on any specific instance or material found during the search and was therefore considered adhoc in nature.

7. Deletion of Disallowance of Vehicle Running and Maintenance Expenses:
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 17,000/- made by the AO out of vehicle running and maintenance expenses. The CIT(A) observed that the AO did not provide any specific basis for the disallowance and that the expenses were supported by necessary documentation.

8. Deletion of Disallowance of Vehicle Depreciation Expenses:
The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 20,000/- made by the AO out of vehicle depreciation expenses. The CIT(A) found that the AO's disallowance was not based on any specific instance or material found during the search and was therefore considered adhoc in nature.

9. Legal Validity of Disallowances Not Based on Incriminating Material Found During Search Under Section 153A:
The CIT(A) held that in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search, no disallowance or addition could be made under Section 153A. The CIT(A) relied on various judicial precedents, including the decisions of the ITAT Kolkata Bench in LMJ International Ltd. vs. DCIT, the Visakhapatnam Bench in KGR Exports vs. JCIT, and the Delhi High Court in CIT(Central)-III vs. Kabul Chawla, which consistently held that assessments under Section 153A should be based on incriminating material found during the search.

10. Overall Correctness of the CIT(A)'s Order:
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, agreeing that the disallowances and additions made by the AO were not sustainable in the absence of incriminating material found during the search. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT(A)'s order was well-reasoned and did not require any interference.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, confirming the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the various disallowances and additions made by the AO. The Tribunal emphasized that assessments under Section 153A must be based on incriminating material found during the search and that adhoc disallowances without specific basis were not sustainable.

← Previous Next →