9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 on 04.08.2016 followed by the search in issue dt.04.07.2017. Revenue s argument that it had not filed any return in the corresponding assessment year u/s 139(1) we are of the opinion that the decision as to whether the income sought to be added as under the head undisclosed income has to be seen on the date of search only which purely stands satisfied in the facts of instant appeal. We further wish to observe here that the assessee s returns filed under 2016 scheme stands stood duly accepted as there is no ground in Revenue s pleadings to the contrary. CIT-DR lastly contended that the assessee had not disclosed its IDBI bank account in the computation corresponding to the alleged returns fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. GVK Enterprises, Hyderabad. DCIT, Central Circle -3(4), Hyderabad 2010-11 to 2013- 14, 2015- 16 and 2017-18 CIT(A)-11, Hyderabad dt.11.09.2020 10143, 10147, 10117, 10120, 10133 and 10170 /2019-20 143(3) r.w.s 153C 45 to 49/Hyd/2021 ACIT, Central Circle -3(4), Hyderabad M/s. Sri Krishna Constructions, Hyderabad. PAN : ABBFS8556K 2010-11 to 2012- 13, 2015- 16 and 2017-18 -do- 10143, 10147, 10117, 10133 and 10170/ 2019-20 -do Heard both parties. Case files perused. 2. The captioned app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adesh), E.N. Gopakumar Vs. CIT (2017) 390 ITR 131 (Kerala), ITA 270 of 2014 CIT Vs. Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar and CIT Vs. Raj Kumar Arora (2014) 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad) that it is nowhere necessary to initiate and frame section 153A / 153C assessments only in case of incriminating material found / seized during the course of search. 6. We find no merit in the Revenue s instant argument since not only hon ble apex court s recent decision in CIT Vs. Sinhghad Technical Educational Society (supra) but also various decisions of hon ble high courts i.e. CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 360 ITR 573 (Del), CIT Vs. Salasar Stock Broking Limited (Calcutta high court) in G.A.No.1929 of 2016 dt.24.08.2016 and CIT Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry. 8. Learned CIT-DR lastly contended that the assessee had not disclosed its IDBI bank account in the computation corresponding to the alleged returns filed in the year 2016. We find no substances in the instant last argument as well since a perusal of the corresponding account documents indicate that the same had been opened only on 05.08.2016 and therefore, it could not be treated as an undisclosed bank account in assessment years 2010-11 to 2016-17 to say the least. So far as the last A.Y. 2017-18 is concerned, it is made clear that the relevant proceedings therein are in the search year itself only. We therefore decline the Revenue s foregoing arguments in light of all the relevant facts and circumstances forming part of record b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
