9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 140 - AT - Income TaxValidity of assessment u/s 153A - as alleged assessment proceedings for the year under consideration has not abated and no incriminating material relating to the same was found in search - HELD THAT - This Tribunal is taking a consistent view by following various binding precedents that in absence of any incriminating material found or seized during the course of search, the addition cannot be made by the A.O. in the proceedings u/s 153A of the Act when the assessment for the year under consideration was not pending as on the date of search. Thus, following the earlier decision of this Tribunal as well as judgment of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court and the other judgments relied upon by the ld AR, hold that the addition made by the A.O. on account of agricultural income treating the same as income from other sources in absence of any incriminating material is not sustainable and the same is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of addition made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) in the assessment proceedings under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search. Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of Addition under Section 153A: The primary issue in this case revolves around the validity of the addition made by the A.O. under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search. Background: The assessee, an individual, was subjected to a search and seizure action under Section 132(1) of the Act on 03/03/2016. The A.O. issued a notice under Section 153A for six assessment years preceding the year of search, including the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The assessments were completed under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) on 05/12/2017, with an addition of ?96,000 on account of agricultural income being treated as income from other sources. Assessee's Argument: The assessee argued that the original assessment for the year under consideration was concluded prior to the search, and no incriminating material was found during the search. Therefore, the addition made by the A.O. by treating the agricultural income as income from other sources is not sustainable. The assessee relied on several judicial precedents, including: - Jai Steel (India) Vs ACIT (2013) 88 DTR 1 - Saumya Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2016 387 ITR 529 (Guj) - PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Del) - ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of Shri Banna Lal Jat Vs ACIT in ITA No. 474 to 476/JP2018, order dated 24/04/2019 Revenue's Argument: The Revenue contended that under Section 153A, the A.O. is required to assess or reassess the income for the six assessment years preceding the year of search. The income liable to tax discovered during the assessment proceedings can be assessed, regardless of whether it was found during the search. Tribunal's Findings: The Tribunal found that the assessment for the year under consideration was not pending on the date of the search, and thus, it was not a case of abatement of assessment. It was also noted that no incriminating material was found or seized during the search that indicated any undisclosed income or excess claim of agricultural income. The Tribunal relied on binding precedents, including the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Jai Steel (India) Vs ACIT and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia, which held that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition can be made by the A.O. in respect of income already declared by the assessee in the original return of income. The Tribunal cited the Coordinate Bench's decision in Shri Banna Lal Jat Vs ACIT, which reiterated that in the absence of any incriminating material, the A.O. cannot make any addition to the total income of the assessee when the assessment was not abated due to the search and seizure action. Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search, the addition made by the A.O. by treating the agricultural income as income from other sources is not sustainable. The Tribunal deleted the addition and allowed the appeals of the assessee for both assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. Order: The appeals of the assessee were allowed, and the addition made by the A.O. was deleted. The order was pronounced in the open court on 30th September 2019.
|
