TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 774
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No.2393/Del/2014, being the Assessee's appeal against the decision of the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) [hereafter 'CIT(A)' ] sustaining the addition of a sum of Rs. 20,25,00,000/- on account of unexplained credit under Section 68 of the Act, on merits. The Revenue has filed the present appeal ( ITA 771/2014) being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal insofar as it has upheld the CIT(A)'s view that the aforesaid addition made by the Assessing Officer (hereafter 'AO') was beyond the scope of assessment under Section 153A of the Act. The Assessee states that it has filed the present appeal (ITA 185/2015) only for the reason that the Revenue has preferred an appeal against the order of the Tribunal. 2. The principal controversy inv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../-. The AO made an addition of Rs. 20,25,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Act as the AO was of the view that the share application money received by the Assessee Company was unexplained. 3.2 The Assessee preferred an appeal against the Assessment Order before the CIT(A), being Appeal No. 320/2013-14, inter alia challenging the addition on merits as well as on the ground that the addition was beyond the scope of Section 153A of the Act. According to the Assessee, the share application money was duly disclosed in its return and the addition was unrelated to any incriminating material found during the search and, thus, was beyond the scope of assessment under Section 153A of the Act. 3.3 The CIT(A) disposed of the Appeal by an order date....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decision of the ITAT insofar as the Tribunal sustained the finding of the CIT(A) that the addition made in respect of the share application money was beyond the scope of Section 153A of the Act. 4. The learned counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Tribunal erred in permitting the Revenue to challenge the finding of the CIT(A) with regard to the scope of Section 153A of the Act. He submitted that since the Revenue had not appealed against the decision of the CIT(A), it could not raise the issue before the Tribunal. He referred to the decision of this Court in CIT vs. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd.: (1980) 123 ITR 200(Del), in support of his contention that it would not be open for the respondent to travel outside the scope ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....additions made by the AO were beyond the scope of Section 153A had been decided by the CIT(A) in favour of the Assessee and the decision on the said issue had attained finality as the Revenue had not preferred any appeal with regard to the CIT(A)'s order. 8. It is also relevant to note that by virtue of Section 253(2) of the Act, the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner may, if he objects to an order passed by the CIT(A) under Section 250 of the Act, direct the AO to prefer an appeal to the Tribunal. It is not disputed that no such directions to file an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order dated 21st January, 2014 were issued by the concerned Income Tax Authority. 9. In the circumstances, there could be no dispute that the CIT(A)'s ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thority which is detrimental to the interests of the revenue is capable of being corrected by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner even without an appeal having been presented by the department. At the next stage of second appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, the liberty is given to both the sides to go up in appeal to the Appellate Tribunal and when the Appellate Tribunal comes to deal with the matter, the law regards it sufficient to leave it to the parties going up as appellants before the Tribunal to limit their attack on the order of the first appellate authority and to seek the intervention of the Tribunal only to the extent necessary to correct the errors in the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner according to the case of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that a party who has not appealed cannot be permitted to raise a ground, which will work adversely to the appellant. 12. Indisputably, the Revenue could also not take recourse to Rule 27 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. By virtue of the said Rule, a respondent before the Tribunal can support the decision appealed against not only on the grounds decided in favour of the respondent but also on grounds decided against it. However, Rule 27 of the said Rules would not extend to permitting the respondent to expand the scope of an appeal and assail the decision on issues, which are not subject matter of the appeal. In CIT vs. Edward Keventer (Successors) Pvt. Ltd (supra), this court had reiterated that "it would not be open ....