9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 750X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence of reference to any incriminating material which may have any bearing to the impugned additions/disallowances except some statement of witness adverse to assessee in an all together different search proceedings. As decided in ANAND KUMAR JAIN (HUF) , SATISH DEV JAIN, SAJAN KUMAR JAIN, [ 2021 (3) TMI 8 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has observed in identical fact it is manifest that additions/disallowances have been made without reference to any specific incriminating material/document found as a result of search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act and such additions are solely based on deposition made by a witness against the assessee in the course of search in that case. Besides, the integrity of confession obtained is unknown. N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 18.07.2018 -do- -do- 3. ITA No.5957/Del/2018 -do- -do- -do- 2. In the captioned appeal, the assessee raised a common ground whereby the assessee has challenged the jurisdiction usurped by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 153A of the Act towards additions/disallowances made. 3. In view of the preliminary objections of the assessee which seeks to put question mark over the legitimacy of additions/disallowances made under section 153A of the Act, we deem it expedient to dispose of the aforesaid preliminary ground as it strikes the root of the matter. 4. Briefly stated, a search and seizure opera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adeep Kumar Jindal who was also simultaneously searched under section 132 of the Act. Mr. Jindal is stated to have made certain adverse averment towards providing accommodation entries to various beneficiaries including the captioned assessee(s) herein. The learned Counsel assertively reiterated that there is no reference to any seized material adverse to the assessee which has any connection or bearing with the impugned additions in any of the three appeals. The learned Counsel quipped that the adjustments made to the returned income by the AO in the instant appeals are either subject matter of regular assessment or probably can be assessed under section 153C of the Act but however certainly do not resonate with the scheme of search assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Counsel referred to the judgement delivered by Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain HUF and others 432 ITR 384 where in the context of same search and in the same fact situation, the Hon ble High Court observed that additions on the basis of statement recorded in a separate search action in the case of a third person is not permissible in section 153A proceedings. The Hon ble High Court observed that the statement of third person cannot be construed as an incriminating material belonging to or pertaining to the person other than the person searched. In other words, the statement of Pradeep Kumar Jindal or his employee etc. in the course of search carried out in his case cannot be regarded as any incriminatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee that additions/disallowances could not be made in the assessment framed under section 153A of the Act de-horse reference to any incriminating material found in the course of search in the hands of the assessee. It is further case of the assessee that any adverse statement of a third party (Pradeep Kumar Jindal in the instant case recorded under section 132(4) of the Act) cannot be read as incriminating material found in the course of search in the case of these assessee(s). Thus, the statement recorded in the course of search in that case cannot be imported in the case of the captioned assessee(s) for the purposes of salutary condition of existence of incriminating material at the time of search in the hands of assessee(s). The stateme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the course of search in that case. Besides, the integrity of confession obtained is unknown. No cross examination of the witness was provided to the assessee either and consequently, such statement is unworthy of reliance. 9. Guided by the principles laid down in Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. (SC) (supra) and Ananad Kumar Jain (HUF) (Delhi High Court), we find force in the legal plea raised on behalf of the assessee. Hence, in the absence of any incriminating material in an unabated assessment additions/disallowances made by AO in all captioned appeals requires to be quashed. In this view of the matter, we do not consider it necessary to adjudicate other legal and factual aspects concerning additions/disallowances. 10. In the result ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
