9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 42 gunny bags actually related to Asaram Group) and possession of the same was taken by the Department. The 42 gunny bags contained incriminating documents which, noting having revenue implication and relating to the assessee also; therefore, proceedings under Section 153C of the Act were initiated on the assessee for the Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2013-14. The assessment for the search year i.e. AY 2015-16 was also taken under scrutiny. Thereafter, the assessment was framed for the impugned year making addition of approximately Rs.4.80 crores to the returned income of the assessee of Rs.1.51 lakhs on account of the following:- i) Surplus profit over sales as per P&L account = Rs.1,51,17,649/- ii) Customer advance and bogus sundry creditors = Rs. 61,16,020/- iii) Unexplained cash/cheque deposit in benami name Krishna Behenji = Rs. 8,00,000/- iv) Cash in hand = Rs. 20,65,776/- v) Unexplained loan in purchase of land = Rs.2,40,00,000/- Total = Rs.4,80,99,445/- 3. The assessment framed was an ex-parte assessment under Section 144 r.w.s. 153C of the Act since the assessee, despite repeated opportunities given, failed to participate in the proceedings. 4. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or requisition of books of accounts, there is no such stipulation in sec.153A and sec.153BI specifically states that the provisions of Chapter-XIV-B, under which sec.158BB fails, would not be applied where a search was initiated u/s.132 after 31/5/2003. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that assessment in relation to certain issues not related to the search and seizure may arise in any of the said six assessment years after the search u/s.132 is conducted in the case of the assessee, and that if the interpretation of the ld. CIT(A) were to hold it will not be possible to assess such income in the 153C proceedings, while no other parallel proceedings to assess such other income can be initiated, leading to no possibility of assessing such other income, which could not have been the intention of the legislature. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,51,17,649/- on account of disallowance made u/s 80IC of the Act. 5.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oan as assessee failed to establish the creditworthiness and genuineness of these transaction. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 10. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored to the above extent." 5. Ground Nos. 1 to 4 are the legal grounds raised by the Revenue. A perusal of the same reveals that the Revenue has challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) holding the assessment framed invalidly in the absence of incriminating material found, challenging the judicial proposition laid down by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in this regard. All the grounds from Ground Nos. 1 to 4 challenged this basic proposition laid down by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court as is evident from Ground No.1 wherein the Revenue has contended that assessment under Section 153C of the Act cannot be confined to the incriminating material. In Ground No.2, the Revenue has contended that the provisions of law require assessment of six years to be framed prior to the year of search under Section 153C of the Act and there is no clause for no assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ended 31.03.2010 of Rs.20,55,776/-, but with respect to documents relating to land, there was no addition made by the Assessing Officer. The addition of Rs.2,40,00,000/- made on account of unexplained loan in purchase of land related to the unsecured loan of Rs.2.40 crores taken by the assessee from various parties which was added to the income of the assessee on account of its genuineness having not been proved as per the provisions of Section 68 of the Act. This addition of Rs.2.40 crores had nothing to do with the documents relating to the land which was requisitioned. Therefore, from the documents allegedly relating to the assessee which were requisitioned in this case, addition only in relation to the bank deposit slip and the cash book of the assessee was made. 9. From the order of the Ld. CIT(A) it transpires that both these documents were found to be not incriminating in nature even by the Assessing Officer in remand proceedings. 10. With respect to the bank deposit slip of Rs.8 lakhs, we have noted from paragraph No.10 of the Ld. CIT(A)'s order, where the Assessing Officer's remand report with respect to this deposit slip is reproduced, that the Assessing Officer had adm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot cash book but it is a ledger account of Head office in the books of Achyutaya Hariom Pharma and the amount mentioned therein were amounts received for day to day expenditure and payment made by head office to the suppliers on behalf of the branch. The assessee has also enclosed ledger account of suppliers at page 50 to 56 of the written submission in which payment made by the head office is reflected. Since the details were not submitted before this office; therefore this office had no option but to add the same to the total income. The said details have been submitted for the first time at the time of appeal therefore, the issue on hand may be decided on merits." Clearly, even this cash book requisitioned in the case of the assessee was found by the Assessing Officer himself to be not incriminating in nature. 12. Therefore, the findings of the learned CIT(A) that no incriminating material relating to the assessee was requisitioned in the present case, we find, is the admitted case of the Assessing Officer . Further, it is not disputed that the assessment for the impugned year was unabated. The proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Saumya Con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
