TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 1156
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es but however both the assessees belong to the same group, the issue involved in both the appeals are identical except amounts involved and therefore the submissions made by him for one year would be applicable to the other year also. Ld DR did not controvert the aforesaid submissions of Ld AR. In view of the aforesaid submissions of the Counsel, we for the sake of convenience proceed to dispose of both the appeals by a consolidated order but for the sake of reference refer to the facts for A.Y. 2006-07 in ITA No.1917/Del/2015. 3. The relevant facts as culled from the material on records are as under: 4. Assessee is a company stated to be engaged in the business of dealing in investment and consultancy in Real Estate. AO has noted that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial found and seized as a result of search. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly erred in holding that the Ld. Assessing Officer is empowered U/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to disturb the items of regular assessment even without any adverse material found, and seized as a result of search. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly erred in upholding the addition of share capital & share premium of 1,55,00,000/- made by Ld. Assessing Officer. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in Ground No.3 to 6 assessee is challenging the additions on merit. 7. With respect to Ground No.1 & 2, before us, Learned AR submitted that for the A.Y. 2006-07 assessee had originally filed its return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 30.03.2007 and the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. He submitted that the time limit for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) was up to 30.06.2008 but no notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued up to 30.06.2008. He submitted that on the expiry of the aforesaid period for issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, the assessment for A.Y 2006-07 is deemed to have been concluded. He further submitted that search in the case of assessee was conducted on 23.11.2010 and during the course of such searc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....liance on the order of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Best Food Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No.1184/Del/2014) and Heritage Infracon Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITA No.1919/Del/2015). He therefore submitted that the assessment be set aside. 8. Learned DR on the other hand supported the order of lower authorities. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In the present case the assessment has been framed u/s 153A of the Act. Sec.153A of the Act lays down that in respect of searches carried out under section 132 of the Act or requisition of books and other documents made under section 132A of the Act after 31.05.2003, the Assessing Officer shall issue a notice calling upon assessee to furnish return of income i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2010, the assessment for the impugned assessment year 2006-07 was not pending. Therefore the acceptance of the return of income amounts to an assessment and such assessment did not abate in terms of the Second Proviso to section 153A(1) of the Act. 12. It is the plea of the learned counsel for the Assessee that the impugned additions made by the Assessing Officer could not have been made in the impugned assessment proceedings as they are not based on any material seized or found during the course of search of the assessee. We find force in the aforesaid submissions of Learned AR. We find that the additions which has been made by the AO is with respect to Share Capital and Share premium, and there is no reference in the assessment order tha....