9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1059X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the year under consideration. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 261 And 262/DEL/2015 - - - Dated:- 18-12-2017 - SHRI S.K. YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Smt. Paramita Tripathy, CIT-DR For The Assessee : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA ORDER PER BENCH:- Both the above appeals preferred by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 11.11.14 passed by the CIT(A), Meerut for A.Ys 2003-04 and 2004-05. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that an assessment order was passed u/s.153A/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short] on 28.12.07 in the case of the assessee. In the appeal filed by the assessee against the said order, Ld. CIT(A) Meerut vide his order dt.29.06.09 deleted both the additions which are under consideration in this appeal. The Revenue challenged the same before this Tribunal being ITA No.3794/D/2009 and the assessee also filed cross objections bearing CO No.365/D/2009. Both the matters were decided by the ITAT vide common order dated 01.07.11. The ITAT, vide Para-34 of its order remitted all legal issues challengi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AY 2003-04 was an unabated AY. It has been submitted that in this case, search u/s.132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short] took place on 27.10.05. The regular return of A.Y.2003-04 was filed on 20.10.03. The notice u/s.143 (2) for A.Y.2003-04, as the law stood at that point of time, could have been issued only upto 31.10.04, however no such notice was issued till that time and also that no proceedings were pending in respect of A.Y.2003-04 as on 27.10.05. The Ld. AR further submitted that in this case, the additions which have been made relate to only two gifts of ₹ 4,00,000/- ₹ 3,50,000/- received from Smt. Laxmi Aggarwal and Sh. Kesho Ram Gupta respectively through bank accounts during the year and there is no incriminating material found in search in respect of these two gifts. It has been contended that these gifts were noticed only on perusal of regular bank account of the assessee during the course of asstt. proceedings u/s153A. It has also been stated that these gifts were duly appearing in the regular balance sheet as on 31.03.03 as well as in the capital account. The Ld. AR further stated that since A.Y.2003-04 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h i.e. on 27.10.05. In this case, the additions under dispute are in respect of two gifts of ₹ 4,00,000/- ₹ 3,50,000/- received during the year from Smt. Laxmi Aggarwal and Sh. Kesho Ram Gupta respectively, on 22.07.02. No incriminating material was found and seized during search relating to these two gifts. The credits in the bank a/c in respect of these two gifts were noticed by the A.O. during the course of impugned proceedings u/s.153A, while examining the regular bank account of the assessee. The perusal of copies of various panchnamas executed during the course of search as placed before us vide Pgs.1-14 of the paperbook, reveals that cash and jewellery were found during search. From the copy of capital account for AY 2003-04, it is apparent that gifts of ₹ 7,50,000/- appears in the capital account being received in this year through cheques. Thus, all these facts clearly show that firstly, it was an unabated AY and secondly, that no incriminating material was found and seized during search for that AY. The contention of the Ld. Counsel, under these facts, is that, in case of unabated assessments u/s.153A, the addition can be made only on the basis of incr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g an opportunity of hearing makes the impugned Asstt. Order invalid and unsustainable in law. iii. That under the facts and circumstances, addition of ₹ 9 lacs for gift received from Sh. Anand Jain is unsustainable in law as well as on merits. iv. That under the facts and circumstances, addition of ₹ 10 lacs for gift received from Sh. Balbir Singh is unsustainable in law as well as on merits. v. That under the facts and circumstances, addition of ₹ 10 lacs for gift received from Sh. Kirodi Mal is un sustainable in law as well as on merits. 12. In ground no. 1, the Ld. AR has contended that the facts and circumstances of this year are similar to that of A.Y.2003-04. It has been argued that this year i.e. A.Y.2004-05 is also an unabated AY wherein no incriminating material has been found and seized. The additions are in respect of three gifts of ₹ 9,00,000/-, ₹ 10,00,000/- ₹ 10,00,000/- received during the year from Sh. Anand Jain, Sh. Balbir Singh and Sh. Kirori Mal respectively. 13. In the present case, search u/s.132 took place on 27.10.05. The regular return was filed in August 2004 and the notice u/s.143 (2) coul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
