9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 331X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 153C in the Statute to frame the assessment. If the Assessing Officer frames the assessment without resorting to the dedicated section provided by the legislature, the whole exercise of enacting such a provision would become futile. Similar was the fate of members of the family, namely Shri Anand Kumar Jain, HUF, Individual, Shri Satish Dev Jain. In their respective cases also, under similar circumstances, assessment was framed u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Act. In their cases also, basis of the addition was a statement of Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal recorded on oath u/s 132(4) of the Act wherein he admitted to providing accommodation entries to Shri Anand Kumar Jain, HUF and his family members and the entries found in the incriminating ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ember, And Ms. Astha Chandra, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Kapil Goel, Adv For the Department : Ms. Aashna Paul, CIT- DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The above captioned three separate appeals by the assessee in the case of Indo Autotech Ltd are preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A) - 29 New Delhi pertaining to Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2013-14 respectively. The other four captioned separate appeals by the assessee in the case of Admach Auto India Limited are preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A) - 29 New Delhi pertaining to Assessment Years 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively. 2. The common challenge in the captioned appeals of bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntries from Shri Pradeep Kumar Jindal as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. 7. In ITA No. 6794/DEL/2018, there is also an addition of Rs. 52.50 lakhs which is on the basis of some documents found and seized during the course of search proceedings from the office premises of Indo Autotech Ltd. 8. Additions were challenged before the ld. CIT(A) by the appellants but without any success. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. The common facts resulting into the impugned additions have been explained hereinabove. It would be pertinent to refer to the impugned assessment order. It can be seen that the impugned assessment orders are framed u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the course of search conducted in the case of a third party (i.e., search of Pradeep Kumar Jindal) for making the additions in the hands of the assessee. As per the mandate of Section 153C, if this statement was to be construed as an incriminating material belonging to or pertaining to a person other than person searched (as referred to in Section 153A), then the only legal recourse available to the department was to proceed in terms of Section 153C of the Act by handing over the same to the AO who has jurisdiction over such person. Here, the assessment has been framed under section 153A on the basis of alleged incriminating material (being the statement recorded under 132(4) of the Act). As noted above, the Assessee had no opportunity t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld not be treated as unexplained investment in shares and Rs. 2,50,000/- as commission paid. 17. It was again explained that the assessee was contemplating to transfer Rs. 50 lakhs through RTGS which transfer did not materialize and no such entries were passed and the same can be verified from the bank account of the assessee. 18. The Assessing Officer finally made the addition holding that the assessee has received accommodation entries of share application/premium in lieu of cash and made addition of Rs. 52.50 lakhs which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 19. As explained hereinabove, first the Assessing Officer proceeded by treating the entries as unexplained expenditure and sought explanation from the assessee. Then the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
