2023 (11) TMI 198 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee's appeal allowed for statistical purposes due to CIT(Appeals) inadequate consideration under sections 153A and 56(2)(viia)

M/s. Riya Real Estates Private Limited Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Raipur (C.G.)

ITAT Raipur allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes in a case involving assessment under section 153A and addition under section ... Validity of assessment u/s 153A - due approval u/s 153 D - Addition invoking the provisions of section 56(2)(viia) - addition alleging anomalies in the method of valuation adopted by the AO - Admission of additional documentary evidence denied - HELD THAT:- As stated by the assessee, and rightly so there were justifiable reasons on its part for not filing the requisite details/documents, which have been filed before us as additional evidence, in the course of the proceedings before the CIT(Appeals). Also, it is a matter of fact borne from the record that the CIT(Appeals) had merely referred to the observations of the A.O. and disposed off the appeal by approving the same. We, thus, in the totality of the facts involved in the present case before us, read a/w. multi-facet contentions that have been raised by the assessee before us wherein adjudication of the majority of those would require a reference of the additional documentary evidence that the assessee has placed before us, restore the matter to the file of the CIT(Appeals) with a direction to him to re-adjudicate the same after taking cognizance of the additional documentary evidence and also addressing the additional grounds of appeal that have been raised by the assessee in the course of the proceedings before us - CIT(Appeals) shall, in the course of set-aside proceedings, afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee company, which shall remain at liberty to substantiate its contentions on the basis of fresh documentary evidence. Assessee appeal allowed for statistical purposes Issues Involved:1. Validity of the ex-parte appellate order.2. Legality of the addition made under Section 56(2)(viia) of the Income-tax Act.3. Validity of the Search Assessment Order framed under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act.4. Validity of the approval granted under Section 153D by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax.Summary:Validity of the ex-parte appellate order:The assessee argued that the ex-parte appellate order passed by the CIT(A) was highly unjustified, bad in law, and against the principles of natural justice. The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had disposed of the appeal by merely referring to the observations of the A.O. and without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication after taking cognizance of the additional documentary evidence and addressing the additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee.Legality of the addition made under Section 56(2)(viia):The assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 459,92,50,000/- made by the A.O. under Section 56(2)(viia) was highly unjustified and not based on any incriminating material. The A.O. had valued the shares at an unrealistic value, leading to the taxation of notional, unreal, and imaginary income. The tribunal admitted the additional evidence provided by the assessee, which had a strong bearing on the valuation of the shares. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.Validity of the Search Assessment Order framed under Section 153A r.w.s. 143(3):The assessee challenged the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O. for framing the assessment, arguing that no incriminating material was seized during the search proceedings. The tribunal noted that this claim required verification by the A.O. by referring to the seized record/material. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.Validity of the approval granted under Section 153D by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax:The assessee argued that the approval granted under Section 153D was mechanical and without application of mind, rendering the assessment order invalid. The tribunal observed that the approval dated 08.11.2016 was a consolidated approval for eight group entities and lacked application of mind. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.Conclusion:Both appeals of the assessee for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 were allowed for statistical purposes, with directions to the CIT(A) to re-adjudicate the matters after considering the additional documentary evidence and addressing the additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. The CIT(A) was instructed to afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.