2020 (5) TMI 234 - AT - Income Tax

Additions of Unexplained receipt on protective basis - HELD THAT - On consideration of submission of Ld. CIT-DR which could not be controverted by Ld. Representatives of concerned assessees, that the divergent view have been taken by the appellate authorities below, we are of the view that in the interest of justice and fair play the present impugned orders are required to be set aside with direction to Ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeals de novo in the light of aforesaid facts. Accordingly, the issues raised in the present appeals are remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the same afresh as per law with direction that the ld. CIT(A) would decide the appeals relating to substantive proceedings at first and thereafter the appeals relating to protective assessments.

Issues involved:
- Appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 & 2012-13.
- Multiple appeals by the assessee(s) & Revenue related to a Kalani Group.
- Addition made by the AO on account of unexplained receipts on a protective basis.
- Relief granted to the assessee by deleting certain additions.
- Validity of reassessment proceedings under sections 147 and 153C.
- Disallowance of undisclosed income and deductions.
- Contradictory views by appellate authorities regarding protective assessments.

Analysis:

1. Addition on Account of Unexplained Receipts:
- The Revenue raised grounds of appeal against the CIT(A) erred in deleting additions made by the AO on account of unexplained receipts. The appeals by the assessee(s) & Revenue were interconnected and related to the Kalani Group. The issues pertained to substantial sums and were made on a protective basis without proper appreciation of facts and evidence by the CIT(A).

2. Relief Granted and Deletion of Additions:
- The CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee by deleting various additions made by the AO, including those related to unexplained receipts, investments, and modifications. The grounds of appeal by the Revenue challenged these deletions, highlighting discrepancies in the assessment proceedings and the relevance of additional evidences admitted without a remand report.

3. Validity of Reassessment Proceedings:
- The assessee challenged the validity of reassessment proceedings under sections 147 and 153C. They argued that reassessment should have been done under section 153C due to the search and seizure operation at third-party premises. The grounds of appeal emphasized the jurisdictional aspect and the overriding effect of section 153C over sections 147/148.

4. Disallowed Income and Deductions:
- Both the Revenue and assessee raised grounds related to disallowed income and deductions. The Revenue contested the deletion of disallowances made by the AO, citing discrepancies in the assessment process and the establishment of links between seized documents and the assessee. The assessee challenged additions made on the basis of client code modification and claimed deductions under section 10A(1A).

5. Contradictory Views on Protective Assessments:
- The appellate authorities had divergent views on protective assessments, leading to confusion in the decision-making process. The parties presented arguments regarding the consideration of protective assessments in substantive proceedings. The ITAT remitted the issues back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision in the interest of justice and fair play, emphasizing the need for a consistent approach.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed multiple complex issues involving additions, deletions, reassessment proceedings, and contradictory views on protective assessments. The ITAT's decision to remit the issues back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision reflects the importance of procedural fairness and consistent application of tax laws.

← Previous Next →