2018 (2) TMI 2041 - HC - Income Tax

Court affirms ITAT's decision to delete added amount under Income Tax Act

The Court upheld the decision of the ITAT to delete the added amount by the Assessing Officer under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court ... Assessment u/s 153A - search u/s 132 - whether the ITAT fell into error in deleting the amount added as per 60A by the Assessing Officer pursuant to a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? - HELD THAT:- In this case the search took place in the premises on 03.10.2013. A notice u/s 153A was issued to the assessee which re-affirmed its earlier returns. AO completed the Section 153A assessment by adding amounts u/s 60A to the tune for AY 2011-12. CIT (A) and the ITAT concurrently granted relief to the assessee in the appellate proceedings holding that no fresh incriminating material was seized warranting the additions during the search. Both the appellate authorities relied upon the judgment of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla,[2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT] In these circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that no question of law arises as the ratio in Kabul Chawla (supra) applied. Issues:- Whether the ITAT erred in deleting the amount added by the Assessing Officer under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Analysis:The case involved a dispute regarding the addition of an amount by the Assessing Officer under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following a search conducted on the premises. The Assessing Officer added an amount of Rs. 5,62,61,726 for the assessment year 2011-12 under Section 153A. However, both the CIT (A) and the ITAT granted relief to the assessee in the appellate proceedings. They held that no fresh incriminating material was found during the search to warrant the additions. The appellate authorities relied on the judgment in CIT v. Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573, to support their decision.The key question before the Court was whether the ITAT was correct in deleting the added amount. The Court noted that the search conducted did not yield any fresh incriminating material justifying the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Court found that the decisions of the CIT (A) and the ITAT were in line with the principles established in the judgment of CIT v. Kabul Chawla. The Court held that since no fresh incriminating material was found during the search, the additions made by the Assessing Officer were not warranted.In light of the above analysis, the Court concluded that there was no question of law arising in the case as the principles laid down in the Kabul Chawla case were applicable. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, upholding the decision of the ITAT to delete the added amount.