9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT(A)"] dated 09.03.2023 & 17.03.2023, pertaining to the assessment years 2013 - 14 & 2014-15. For the sake of convenience, these two appeals are hereby disposed of through this consolidated order. The grounds of appeal are as under: - "1. Because the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- made by the learned assessing officer under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by treating the same as unexplained cash credit. 2.1. Because the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in refusing to admit additional evidence submitted by the assessee during the appellate proceedings. 2.2 Because, without prejudice, in the interests of justice, the learned CIT(A) ought to have admitted additional evidence submitted by the assessee during the appellate proceedings since the same go to the root of the issue before the learned CIT(A). 3. Because, without prejudice, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 2,00,00,000/made by the learned assessing officer despite the fact that no incriminating document was found against the assessee during the course of search. 4. Because the learned CIT(A) has passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd (2023) 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC)/(2023) 293 Taxman 141 (SC)/(2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC). He further submitted that the Lucknow Bench of ITAT in the case of Smt. Shashi Agarwal (2024) 167 taxmann.com 687 (Lucknow Trib.), considered aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd (supra) and decided the issue in favour of the assessee relying on the same. He further submitted that in the present appeals, the additions made by the Assessing Officer are not based on any incriminating documents found in the course of search. He further submitted that the additions have been made only on the basis of figures reported in the balance-sheet of the assessee. Relying on the aforesaid cases of Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd (supra), and Smt. Shashi Agarwal (supra), he contended that the additions made in the assessment orders for Assessment Year 2013-14 and Assessment Year 2014-15 should be deleted. The Ld. Departmental Representative for Revenue supported the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A) and relying on the same. 4. We have heard both sides. We have perused the materials on record. In the case of Smt. Shashi A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rch and the other material available with the AO including the income declared in the returns; and (iv) in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be reopened by the AO in exercise of powers under sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfillment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved. The question involved in the present set of appeals and review petition is answered accordingly in terms of the above and the appeals and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs." (C.1) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U. K. Paints (Overseas) Ltd. (supra) widened the application of the order in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (supra) to assessments cond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Wedding Centre vs. DCIT 362 ITR 664 (Ker.), E. N. Gopakumar 75 taxmann.com 215 (Kerala), etc. The issue has now been finally settled by decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid cases of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell (supra) and Dy. CIT vs. U. K. Paints (Overseas) Ltd. (supra) wherein view in favour of assessee has been taken. (C.2.1) In the present appeals before us, the additions have been made by the Assessing Officer in assessment orders passed u/s 153A of the IT Act. Further, we have already noted earlier that the relevant facts are not in dispute. It is not in dispute that no incriminating materials were found in the course of search u/s 132 of the IT Act in respect of the various additions made by the Assessing Officer. Further it is also not in dispute that no assessment proceedings were pending in the cases of the assessee at the time of search conducted on 08/07/2016 in the case of the assessee, u/s 132 of the IT Act. Furthermore, as no assessment proceedings were pending in the case of the assessee at the time when (on 08/07/2016) search u/s 132 of the IT Act was conducted, the case of the assessee in the present appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
