9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure operation and survey operation under section 132/133A of the I.T. Act, 1961 were conducted on 12th April, 2012 in the case of the assessee-company along with others. In this case, reference for exchange of information was made by Investigation Wing. Subsequent to this, notice under section 153A of the Act was issued and assessee-company filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 167,14,24,547. The A.O. issued questionnaire as well as statutory notice. The assessee- company produced the documents and accounts in support of the submissions. 2.1. The A.O. noted that during the course of search proceedings, Annexure-AA-1 was seized from the office premises of M/s. ACB (India) Ltd., Gurgaon, page-2 of this annexure is related with the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Rs. 140 crores and the estimated profit for the year ended March 31, 2012, is Rs. 160 crores. Therefore, the assessee-company reduced the excess profit of Rs. 20 crores. The A.O. also noted that assessee's company tax payment indicates that assessee- company paid advance tax of Rs. 37,50,00,000 and also paid self-assessment tax of Rs. 16,50,00,000 which reflects the intention of the assessee- company regarding reduction in taxable profits and its profits could not be correctly shown. The A.O. accordingly, made addition of Rs. 20 crores and computed the income of the assessee-company at Rs. 187,14,24,550. 3. The assessee-company challenged the addition before Ld. CIT(A). The written submissions of the assessee- company are reproduced in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ., vs. CIT, Bombay 56 ITR 365 and also referred to Section 114 of the Evidence Act. The Ld. D.R. in the alternative contention submitted that the matter may be remanded to Ld. CIT(A) for appraisal of the seized document. 6 The Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and submitted that document was not recovered from the possession of the assessee-company because it was recovered from M/s. ACB (India) Ltd. It was submitted that as per the seized document, the estimated profit of year ending would be Rs. 160 crores. However, the assessee-company has already declared profit of Rs. 167 crore which is much higher. Therefore, no addition is required in the matter. He has submitted that no evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is any manipulation or reduction of the profit in the books of account of the assessee-company. Therefore, the A.O. has miserably failed to support his findings for making addition of Rs. 20 crores. Ld. CIT(A) therefore, correctly deleted the addition. The departmental appeal fails and is dismissed.
8. In the result, appeal of the department is dismissed.
9. The cross objection is merely filed in support of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed.
10. In the result, cross-objection of the assessee- company is dismissed.
11. To sum-up, appeal of the department and cross- objection of the assessee-company are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
