9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in view of the admitted position that the issue in all five appeals are common, we therefore, have clubbed all of them together for the sake of brevity and convenience. However, we are taking ITA No.9454/Del/2019 as a lead case and referring it to the extent relevant to the issues on hand. 4. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the material on record are as under :- 5. Assessee is an individual. AO has noted that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 11.11.2014 at the residential premises of Shri Y. K. Gupta and his family members (Smt. Meera Gupta and Mukul Gupta) at A- 76, Sector-17, Noida, U.P. and M/s. Y. K. Gupta & Co. at 206, Hans Bhawan, 1, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi and his family members (Smt. Meera Gupta and Mukul Gupta) of the assessee comprising Tirupati Sunworld Group of Companies (TSGC). Consequently, notice u/s 153A dated 22.12.2016 was issued and served upon the assessee. In response to the aforesaid notice, assessee vide letter dated 23.12.2016 stated that return of income filed by her for A.Y. 2009-10 on 28.05.2009 declaring total income of Rs.35,69,360/- be treated as return of income filed in response to notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 11.09.2019 in Appeal No.10342/16-17 granted substantial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal and has raised the following grounds: Revenue has raised following grounds in ITA No. 9454/Del/2019 for A.Y. 2009-10: "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of withdrawal of Indexation cost while computing Long Term Capital Gain on Sale of jewellery and sale of shares holding that the assessee did not provide any documentary evidence which could prove that the assessee had purchased the same on any given date. (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained unsecured loan holding that in number of cases, the notices returned un-served by the postal department, reflecting the non-existence of the entities and reflected doubt on the identity of the creditors itself. (iii) The appellant craves to be allowed to add and alter an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was right in deleting the disallowance made by the AO u/s 54F on account of out of long term capital gain on sales of shares holding that the assessee was having more than one property during the year under consideration. (v) The appellant craves to be allowed to add and alter any fresh ground(s) of appeal and / or delete or amend any of the ground(s) of appeal." Revenue has raised following grounds in ITA No. 9457/Del/2019 for A.Y. 2012-13: (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was correct in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of withdrawal of Indexation cost while computing Long Term Capital Gain on Sale of jewellery and sale of shares holding that the assessee did not provide any documentary evidence which could prove that the assessee had purchased the same on any given date. (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained unsecured loan holding that in number of cases, the notices returned un-served by the postal department, reflecting the non-existen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee had claimed Long Term Capital Gain on sale of jewellery and sale of shares. While computing the Long Term Capital Gain, AO noticed that assessee had claimed indexation cost with respect to the jewellery as well as the shares. He noted that since assessee did not furnish complete details with regard to the purchase and payments made for purchase and in view of the short time available at the end of AO to verify the payment, he rejected the indexation cost price of jewellery and shares and accordingly, made additions of Rs.1,25,763/- and Rs.1,83,830/- being the disallowance of indexation cost of jewellery and shares respectively. 12. AO also noticed that during the year under consideration assessee had taken unsecured loans from various parties listed at Page 9 of his assessment order. The aggregate of such unsecured loan was Rs.3,08,09,500/-. AO noted that assessee was asked to furnish the confirmations, ITRs, Bank Accounts of the parties from whom the loans were taken along with the complete postal address and PAN numbers. AO noted that assessee did not furnish the necessary details and according to AO the reasons for non submissions of the details was to avoid proper inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) that no incriminating material was found during the course of search, she submitted that the material found during the course of search has to be considered in totality and CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition. She thus supported the order of AO. 16. Learned AR on the other hand reiterated the submissions made before CIT(A) and supported his order. 17. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the deletion of the additions made by AO in the order framed u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Act. We find that CIT(A) while deleting the additions has given a categorical finding that on the date of search, no assessment or reassessment was pending for any of the years under appeal and the AO in the remand report also has not disputed the aforesaid facts. He has further given a finding that no seized document or material pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 was found during the course of search and the additions that have been made by the AO are not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search. While deleting the additions, CIT(A) has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
