2020 (10) TMI 87

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Officer could not have proceeded to frame assessment u/s 153A of the Act as no incriminating documents or assets were found during the search without appreciating that the provisions of section 153A of the Act does not stipulates any such conditionality. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,59,45,000/- made on account of unexplained cash deposit u/s 68 of the Act, without properly appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case." 2. We have heard the Learned Representative of both the parties through video conferencing and perused the material available on record. 3. Briefly the facts of the case as noted in the impugned order are that in this case original return of income ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessment year under appeal under section 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(A) noted in his finding that in this case under consideration, the A.O. has made addition of Rs. 3,59,45,000/- on account of cash deposits made in the bank account of the assessee company treating the same as unexplained without issuing any show cause notice or giving any opportunity to explain the same. He has noted that since the addition is made without referring any incriminating material found during the course of search, therefore, no addition could be made against the assessee under section 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961, in view of Judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla (supra). The Ld. CIT(A), accordingly deleted....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the course of original assessment" 7.1. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., Meeta Gutgutia 395 ITR 526 (Del.) 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 all for the AO to proceed on surmises and estimates without there being any incriminating material qua the AY for which he sought to make additions of franchisee commission. 70. The above distinguishing factors in Dayawanti Gupta (s....