9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition, the fact that the lender company cannot be treated as a paper company owing to the returned income mentioned above, keeping in view the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal regarding the treatment of amounts received from M/s Cindy Goods Supply Pvt. Ltd. in the case of Nimbus India Ltd. which was also assessed u/s 153A and since the sources have been substantiated, we hereby hold that no addition is warranted in the case of the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 926/Del/2019 (Asstt. Year : 2012-13) - - - Dated:- 15-10-2020 - Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Assessee by : Sh. Neel Kanth Khandelwal, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the action of Ld. AO in making addition of ₹ 1,50,00,000/- on account of unsecured loan u/s 68, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That in any case and in any view of the matter, addition made in the impugned assessment order are beyond jurisdiction and i l legal also for the reason that these could not have been made since no incriminating material has been found as a result of search. 6. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not quashing the impugned assessment order passed by Ld. AO without obtaining the valid approval u/s 153D as per law. 3. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 26. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Circle-4, New Delhi vs. M/s Moolchand Steels Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 2544/DEL/2015 dated 20.10.2018 6. On the other hand, the revenue rel ied on the fol lowing cases laws: CIT Vs Raj Kumar Arora (2014) 367 ITR 517 (All.) CIT Vs Kesarwani Narda Bhandar Sahson Al ld. ITA No. 270 of 2014 (All.) CIT Vs St. Francis Clay D cor Ti les 385 ITR 624 (Ker.) CIT Vs Ani l Kumar Bhatia 352 ITR 493 (Del.) Filatex India Ltd. Vs CIT 49 taxmann.com 465 (Del.) 7. We have considered the issue of validity of addition in the absence of incriminating material. As per the judgment of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla 61 Taxman 412 wherein it was held that where no incrim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervation of ld. CIT (A) that M/s Cindy Goods Supply Pvt. Ltd. is a paper company. 10. Hence, keeping in view the fact that no incriminating materials have been found during the search which led to the addition, the fact that the lender company cannot be treated as a paper company owing to the returned income mentioned above, keeping in view the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal regarding the treatment of amounts received from M/s Cindy Goods Supply Pvt. Ltd. in the case of Nimbus India Ltd. which was also assessed u/s 153A and since the sources have been substantiated, we hereby hold that no addition is warranted in the case of the assessee. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
