TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 180
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed this appeal through the legal aid Sh. Amit Kochar. 2. Brief facts of the case are that there was a search conducted on Aerens group on 17/8/2011. Subsequently there was a search in the case of the assessee under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") on 10/2/2012. Notice under section 152A of the act was issued and the assessee filed written off income on 21/11/2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 42, 52, 180/- by showing Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) of Rs. 7, 55, 401/-, sale consideration of Rs. 22, 50, 000/-and indexed cost of acquisition at Rs. 14, 94, 599/-. 3. By way of order dated 20/3/2014 passed under section 143(3)/153A of the Act learned Assessing Officer observed that the assessee failed to furnis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against the declared value of Rs. 14, 94, 599/- and to prevent leakage of Revenue the learned Assessing Officer repeated the addition of Rs. 1, 44, 599/-. 6. In the appeal against the assessment order dated 6/12/2017, the assessee pleaded, interalia, that for assessment year 2007-08 the assessee was assessed under scrutiny under section 143(3) of the Act and the learned Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's computation of income whereby the capital gains made on the sale of property was disclosed and assessed, and since the assessment in this case was complete under scrutiny assessment, this will not abate. On this ground assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that the learned Assessing Officer can only make an addition on the basi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and Pr. CIT vs. MeetaGutgutiaPr. CIT vs. MeetaGutgutia Prop. M/s. Ferns 'N' Petals (ITA.No.306/2017 dated 25th May, 2017),he submitted that any addition not supported by the incriminating material found during the search, cannot be sustained. 9. Per contra, Ld. DR placed reliance on the orders of the authorities and justified the same on the ground that the authorities followed the directions of the Tribunal; and that the Tribunal directed the learned Assessing Officer to proceed with the reassessment after hearing the assessee and, therefore, the learned Assessing Officer and for that matter the Ld. CIT(A) are justified in making and sustaining the addition on the failure of the assessee to produce any new material. 10. We have gone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 412 (Del) Hon'ble Delhi High Court, having considered its earlier decision in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia (supra), considered the following question of law : "2. The issue that the Court proposes to address in these appeals is the same that was considered by the ITAT viz., "Whether the additions made to the income of the Respondent-Assessee for the said A.Ys under section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') were not sustainable because no incriminating material concerning such additions were found during the course of search and further no assessments for such years were pending on the date of search ?" Hon'ble Court further that : "vii. Completed assessments can be interfered with by the A.O. wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quaeach of those AYs. Conclusion 72. To conclude : (i)Question (i) is answered in the negative i.e., in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. It is held that in the facts and circumstances, the Revenue was not justified in invoking Section 153 A of the Act against the Assessee in relation to AYs 2000-01 to AYs 2003-04." 14. Considering the facts of the case in the light of above decisions, it is clear that the original assessment stood completed on the date of the search and no assessment proceedings were pending as regards the assessment order under appeal i.e., 2007-08. It is an undisputed fact that no incriminating material was recovered during the course of search concerning the addition made on a....