9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 554X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mption of jurisdiction u/s 153C bad in law correctly. Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member And Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicial Member For the Assessee : Mr. S.B. Gupta, CA And Sh. Mormukut, Adv. For the Department : Sh. P. N. Barnwal , CIT-DR ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM The instant appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee are against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [ Ld. CIT(A , for short], dated 27/02/2015 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The grounds of Appeal of the Revenue are as under:- 1. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8287 (25/56), Ward No. XVI, Plot No. 25, Bloack- 56, Karol Bagh, Delhi and the purchase consideration declared by the assessee is illegal and unjustified and therefore, ought to be deleted. 4. That, the addition u/s 69 of Rs. 20,59,10,700/- in respect of the property duly recorded by the assessee in its books of accounts is illegal because the mischief created by section 69 is attracted only if an asset is not recorded in the books of accounts. 5. That the addition of Rs. 20,59,10,700/- u/s 69 is illegal because the Assessing Officer made the addition without having any incriminating document in his possession pointing out to the payment by the assessee of any consideration over and above the consideration recorded in books of acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erest u/s 234A and 234B is illegal, unjustified and ought to be deleted. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act for short) was carried out on M/s Satya Prakash Brothers groups of cases on 28/10/2010, during the search on the group, certain documents relating to Assessee s were claim to have been found and seized. Notices u/s 153C of the Act was issued in the case of the assessee on 08/05/2012. Assessment order came to be passed u/s 153C read with Section 143(3) of the Act by making addition of Rs. 20,59,10,700/- on account of unexplained cash investment in the property, Rs. 28, 762/- on account of business or profession and Rs. 1,10,00,000/- on account of unexplai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central 3 Vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (supra) 454 IT 22 is squarely applicable to the case. Since, the CIT(A) has quashed the assessment order treating the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C bad in law, we find no error or infirmity in the order of the CIT(A), by applying the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Build well (supra), we find no merit in the Grounds of Appeal of the Revenue, accordingly the Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No. 2892/Del/2015 is dismissed. 7. In view of the dismissal of the ITA No. 2892/Del/2015 filed by the Revenue, the C.O No. 106/Del/2016 filed by the assessee becomes infructuous, accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
