9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1718X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 itself, such an assessment stood concluded. It is not the case of Revenue that the additions made in this matter had any reference to any particular document or material that was unearthed during the search so as to justify the reopening of assessment and the additions. It is settled principle of law that in terms of decision in the case of Kabul Chawla [ 2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , Chintels India Ltd [ 2017 (7) TMI 746 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Ltd.[ 2017 (8) TMI 250 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , PCIT Vs. Meeta Gutgutia, [ 2017 (5) TMI 1224 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , Ld. PCIT vs. Ms Lata Jain,[ 2016 (5) TMI 1273 - DELHI HIGH COURT] the assessments and reassessments pending on the date of the search shall ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment year 2009-10, M/s Frontier Commercial Company Ltd. ( the assessee ) preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that pursuant to search and seizure operation that took place in the case of SRS group of cases on 09.05.2012, notice u/s. 153C read with section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) was issued to the assessee on 18.09.2014 and the assessee filed return of income on 17.10.2014 declaring income of Rs.2,95,770/-. After issuing notice u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) and considering the case of the assessee, ld. Assessing Officer determined income of Rs.25,64,432/- u/s. 153A(1)(b) read with section 143(3) of the Act by making addition of Rs.9032/- by invoking the provisions of section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could have been made. He further submitted that the Assessing Officer did not dispute the purchase but doubted the freight charge which is not tenable one. 5. The ld. DR heavily relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that it is only due to the search and reopening of assessment, the authorities could detect the reasons for disallowance of the amounts u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D and disallowance u/s. 37(1) of the Act and therefore, it is not open for the assessee to contend that in view of the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), the addition cannot be sustained. 6. We have gone through the record in the light of submissions made on either side. There is no dispute as to the dates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously, an assessment has to be made under this Section only on the basis of seized material. Thus, in the cases of concluded assessment, no addition/disallowance could be made in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. 8. In view of the settled principle of law, we do not find any justification either for reopening of the concluded assessment or making any addition without any reference or nexus to the material that was seized during the search and the same cannot be sustained. Therefore, the impugned assessment order passed u/s. 153C is quashed. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
