TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1420
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccommodation entries through share application money from non-descript companies. 2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) erred in law and on facts in deleting an addition of Rs. 41,500/- made by the AO w.r.t. commission paid @ 5% for procurement of accommodation entries through share application money from non-descript companies. 3. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) erred in admitting additional evidence under Rule 46A. 4. (a)The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. (b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." (B). The assessee filed original return of income on 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d unfounded. The Revenue has filed this appeal against the aforesaid order dated 25.10.2013 of Ld.CIT(A). At the time of hearing before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the matter is covered in favour of the assessee by order of Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and sought to support the order of the Ld.CIT(A) vide application under Rule 27 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, the relevant portion which is reproduced below:- "The appellant seeks your kind permission to move application under Rule 27 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963 to support the order under appeal. The Ld CIT (A) has allowed the relief to the respondent assessee on merits deleting th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee and therefore the ruling given in the above case has the binding effect on the assessee being in the jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court." (B.1.1). Ld. counsel for the assessee also supported the order of Ld.CIT(A) on merits. Ld.CIT (Departmental Representative), (in short "CIT DR") who appeared on behalf of the Revenue supported the order of the AO. He also relied on the precedents in the cases of E.N.Gopakumar vs CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 215 (Kerala); CIT vs Raj Kumar Arora [2014] 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad)/ [2014] 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad); CIT vs Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar Sahson Alld. [ITA No.270 of 2014] [Allahabad]; Cit vs St.Francis Clay Décor Tiles [385 ITR 624]; and Smt. Dayawanti vs CIT [75 taxmann.com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....In these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the order of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) provides better guidance than the case of Dayawanti vs CIT (supra). In the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla (supra) the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held as under:- "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned ITA Nos. 707, 709 and 713 of 2014 of decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: i. Once a search takes place under Section 132 of the Act, notice under Section 153 A (1) will have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requiring him to file....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record of the AO. vii. Completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under Section 153 A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of ....