AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 472
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....izure operation under section 132 of the I.T. Act, was initiated by the Investigation Wing of the Department on 12th January, 2011 in Saluja group of cases. Cash and jewellery belonging to the assessee were found and seized from the residence of assessee's father Shri Vinod Saluja in whose name search warrant of authorisation was issued. The A.O. accordingly, issued notice under section 153C r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act. The assessee in response to the said notice, filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 4,97,60,870. The A.O. during the assessment proceedings, found that assessee has taken unsecured loans from different parties. The A.O. after considering the explanation of assessee treated the unsecured loans in a sum of Rs. 11,90,57....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d on 18.12.2009, consequent of search and seizure action u/s 132 on 12.01.2012. In the assessment order, no addition was made and the assessment was completed at returned income of Rs.4,97,60,866/-. However, in the subsequent search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act on 12.01.2012, no incriminating document was found. It has been further submitted that the earlier assessment u/s 143(3), was completed on 18.12.2009, before initiation of action u/s 132 on 12.01.2012 and therefore, the assessment was not abated at the time of initiation of second search on 12.01.2012, consequence of which, the assessment order passed by the A.O. on 14.3.2014, is challenged in this appeal. (ii) It has been further submitted by the Appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi, in the case of C1T Vs. Kabul Chawla 61 Taxmann.com 412 (Del), which is squarely applicable to the facts of the appellant. In view of the above, I agree with the arguments of the appellant and therefore, addition made by the A.O. u/s 68, in absence of any incriminating document/evidence, cannot be sustained. Accordingly, ground no. 3 and 8, are hereby, allowed." 4. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the order of the A.O. and also filed written submissions in which it is briefly highlighted that the provisions of Sections 153A/153C are clear and did not mandate requirement of incriminating documents for the purpose of finalising the assessment or re-assessment under the above p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment" 6.1. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its recent decision in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 considering its earlier decisionS in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and Smt. Dayawanti Gupta vs. CIT (supra) held as under : "69. What weighed with the Court in the above decision was the "habitual concealing of income and indulging in clandestine operations" and that a person indulging in such activities "can hardly be accepted to maintain meticulous books or records for long." These factors are absent in the present case. There was no justification at a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ddition under section 68 of the act were found and seized during the course of search. Therefore, no assessment/re-assessment were pending as on the date of search. In the absence of any incriminating material during the course of search, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) for the purpose of deleting the addition. Merely because departmental SLP is pending before the Hon'ble High Court is no ground to take a contrary decision against the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court. We may also refer to judgment of Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Vijay Bhai N. Chandrani vs. ACIT 333 ITR 436 in which it was held as under : "Held, A....