2017 (5) TMI 1768 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal finds Assessing Officer lacked justification for additions under Section 153A

M/s. Jai Lokenath Oil Extractions (P) Ltd. Versus D.C.I.T., Central Circle-XXVII, Kolkata

M/s. Jai Lokenath Oil Extractions (P) Ltd. Versus D.C.I.T., Central Circle-XXVII, Kolkata - TMI Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.2. Validity of the assessment order under Section 153A/143(3).3. Justification of additions made under Section 153A.4. Disallowance of carriage inward and outward expenses under Section 40(a)(ia).5. Treatment of electric service connection charges as capital expenditure.6. Direction to allow depreciation on alleged capital expenditure.Detailed Analysis:1. Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:The Assessee filed an application to condone a 30-day delay in filing the appeal, explaining that the delay was due to the critical illness of the director's elder brother, which prevented the timely signing and submission of the appeal papers. The Tribunal found the reasons satisfactory and condoned the delay, allowing the appeal to proceed.2. Validity of the Assessment Order under Section 153A/143(3):The Assessee argued that the assessment order under Section 153A was invalid as no incriminating material was found during the search. The Tribunal noted that the Assessee's original return for AY 2009-10 was filed under Section 139(1) and no notice under Section 143(2) was issued within the stipulated time, making the assessment deemed concluded. The Tribunal emphasized that assessments under Section 153A should be based on incriminating material found during the search, and since no such material was found, the additions made were invalid. The Tribunal referenced several judicial pronouncements, including CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla and CIT Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation, to support this view.3. Justification of Additions Made under Section 153A:The Tribunal held that the scope of assessment under Section 153A is limited to the assessment of income based on incriminating material found during the search. Since no incriminating material was found, the additions made by the AO were not justified. The Tribunal reiterated that Section 153A does not authorize a de novo assessment and is meant to assess undisclosed income unearthed during the search.4. Disallowance of Carriage Inward and Outward Expenses under Section 40(a)(ia):The AO disallowed carriage inward expenses of Rs. 19,89,870 under Section 40(a)(ia) due to non-compliance with TDS provisions. The Tribunal found that this disallowance was not based on any incriminating material found during the search and thus could not be sustained under Section 153A.5. Treatment of Electric Service Connection Charges as Capital Expenditure:The AO treated electric service connection charges of Rs. 4,90,332 as capital expenditure, adding it to the total income. The Tribunal held that this addition was also not based on any incriminating material found during the search and therefore could not be sustained under Section 153A.6. Direction to Allow Depreciation on Alleged Capital Expenditure:The Assessee argued that if the electric service connection charges were treated as capital expenditure, depreciation should be allowed. However, given the Tribunal's decision to invalidate the addition itself, this ground did not require separate consideration.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeal, concluding that the additions made by the AO under Section 153A were not justified as they were not based on any incriminating material found during the search. Consequently, the other grounds of appeal on merits did not require consideration. The order was pronounced on 03.05.2017.