TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 1199
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of by this common order. 3. First we take up ITA No.4262/Del/2016 as the lead case. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of trading of equity shares, securities and commodities through recognized stock exchanges. It filed its return of income on 31st October, 2007 declaring total income at Rs. 86,67,680/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act, vide intimation dated 21st February, 2009. A search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was initiated in the case of the assessee as part of Jaypee Group on 30th March, 2012. In response to notice u/s 153A issued on 05.08.2013, the assessee filed its return of income on 2nd September, 2013 declaring a total taxable income of Rs. 86,67,6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld.CIT(A) haderred in law and on facts in arriving at the conclusion that the words 'total income' as used in Section 153A would only mean undisclosed income discovered from seized / incriminating material. (d) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in law and on facts in adopting a restrictive and pedantic interpretation of the scope of assessment u/s 153A r.w.s,153C of the Act. (e) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in law and on facts in arriving at the conclusion that the words 'total income' as used in section 153A would only mean income unearthed during search when the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Canara H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that alleged additions made by the A.O. are uncalled for. Based on the above facts, it was also submitted by the appellant that decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla 2015 61Taxmann.com 412(Del), is squarely applicable the facts of the appellant. Conclusion: In view of the above, it is clear that: a) No assessment/reassessment proceedings, were pending as on 30.3.2012 and hence, no assessment was abated. b) The addition made by the A O is not based on any incriminating documents/seized material found during the course of search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act, on 30.3.2012. From the above facts, it is clear that no assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder u/s l53A, since no incriminating document was found during search action u/s 132 and also assessment was not abated, in view of the ratio laid down in the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla 2015, 61 Taxmann.com 412(Del). In view of the above, it is not necessary to adjudicate ground no. 12 to 14 and hence, treated to be allowed." 8. The ld. DR could not controvert the above factual findings given by the CIT(A) that no incriminating material was found during the course of search and the assessment was not pending on the date of search. Therefore, following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (supra), which has sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the ITAT. 7. No substantial question of law arises in the present appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed." 9. Since, admittedly, in the instant case, the addition is not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search and the assessment was not pending on the date of search, therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (supra) and PCIT vs. Varun Beverages Ltd. (supra), we uphold the order of the CIT(A) and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. So far as the contention of the ld. DR that the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) has not been accepted by the Department and th....