AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 680
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to any incriminating material found during action u/s 132 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 801A(4) in respect of following infrastructure projects undertaken by the appellant: Sr. No. of project referred by CIT (Appeals) Name of the project 1 Repairing of road 2 EE/B1/32/04-05 Repairing of road 3 EE/B1/33/04-05 Repairing of road 4 Repairing of road 5 SE/B1/05-06 Repairing of road 6 EE/B1/32/04-05 Repairing of road 7 SE/B1/26/04-05 Repairing of road 8 SE/B1/04-05 Repairing of road 9 EE/B1/05-06 Repairing of road 10 Package No. NABARD/RIDF-V/RAJ/P Repairing of road 11 Repairing of road 12 Job No. SR/Rajkot/204-05/15 Repairing of road 13 Tender No. 49 Repairing of road 14 Providing WBM asphalt carpet 15 Providing WBM asphalt carpet 16 Providing WBM asphalt carpet 17 Providing WBM asphalt carpet 18 Providing WBM asphalt carpet 19 Agreement No. ADB/2 Mahua Road Repairing only 23 Agreement No. CE/6. Repairing of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aver finisher using asphalt (GIDC Rajkot) 74 2006-07 action plan re-carpet road by using Paver in Central Zone (Rajkot Manager Palika) 75 Holenda Umrali Road (Km 0/0 to 3/100) Ta. Rajkot (Panchayat R&B Division Rajkot) 76 SR to Thana Golal Amarpara Resamadi Golal Road Ta. Jetpur (Km 0/0 to 3/80) 77 SR to Vasavad Madhadam Road Km 0/0 to 3/10 Ta. Jasdan 78 Lothadada Bhayasar Road repair & recarpet Bitumen Ta. Rajkot 79 Improvement including strengthening of Urban Road in Jetpur City under R&B Department (Vikashapath Yojna) Pkg. RJD/VP/2 80 SR to SH to Mota Matra Road KmO/0 to 5/0 (selected length) by prov. 25mm thick carpet & 0.18 cum/10 sqm. Seal coat by HMP&PF 81 RMC Zone I & III 82 Recarpeting Road of Word No. 5,6,7,16,17,18, 23 East Zone 83 Modheswar Filtration Plant Una Nagarpalika 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in holding that appellant was not a developer of infrastructure facility in respect of projects specified by him and listed in ground No. 2 above. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and withdraw any ground of appeal anytime up to the heari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iety & Makdar Desai Road 600mm Work 17 Construction of Roads under Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojna PlU-Ujjain 18 Construction of Pavad Side Shoulders between Km. 150/0 to 167/0 on NH 8E Somnath - Bhavnagar Road 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in holding that appellant was not a developer of infrastructure facility in respect of projects specified by him and listed in ground No. 2 above. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11, Ahmedabad erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 50,000/- out of administrative expenses. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and withdraw any ground anytime up to the hearing of this appeal." 3. The Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:- AY 2005-06 "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the deduction U/s 80IA(4) in respect of various projects by treating the assessee as developer instead of work contracts' as treated by the A.O. 2. On the facts-and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in interpreting the provision of section 80IA(4) of the Act whereby the vital conditions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the A.O. 5. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the CIT(A) be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored to the above extent." 4. We shall start with assessment year 2005-06 and since the facts involved in both the years are common, the decision for assessment 2005-06 would apply to assessment year 2006-07 as well. At the outset, the counsel for the assessee has raised the issue of jurisdiction of passing the assessment order for the above years under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on the ground that assessment for the above years were already concluded/unabated and during the course of search initiated on the assessee for the impugned assessment years, no incriminating material was found so as to justify the aforesaid additions. The counsel for the assessee relied on several judicial precedents including on the case of Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions 81 Taxman.com 292 (Gujarat) rendered by the jurisdiction Gujarat High Court which is to the effect that additions under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act in case of completed / unabated assessment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tral or State Govt. or it's enterprises or Semi Govt. Bodies. The assessee was therefore, requested to show cause as to why the deduction u/s. 80IA(4) claimed by the company should not be disallowed, which is apparently a wrong claim and against the provisions of law as discussed above. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx "5. The arguments put forth by the assessee company have been carefully considered and a claim of the assessee has been thoroughly examined in the light of provisions of section 80IA(4) read with explanation inserted after sub section (13) of section 80IA of the Act. On perusal of the reply submitted by the assessee it is seen that the same is not acceptable for the reasons discussed in the following paragraphs: 5.1 The claim of the assessee is that in the decision of Hon. ITAT Mumbai Bench, Mumbai in the case of M/s. All Cargo Global Ltd Vs DCIT(supra) it was held that the assessment years which are not abated has to be finalized on the basis of incriminating materials found during the course of search and which was not produced in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt under section 147, is of immense importance as in this case initial assessment was made under section 143(3) of the Act and deduction under section 80IA was wrongly allowed to the assessee as the assessee was not eligible for deduction in that particular assessment year, the argument of the assessee that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts fully and truly was not accepted as it was felt that such an attitude would be a travesty of justice when the assessee is not eligible for deduction on merit. Further, in the case of Som Datt Builders Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT(2006) 280 ITR(AT)229(Kol) it was held by the Hon. Kolkata High Court that where relief under section 80HHB was wrongly given for a year for which the provision was not applicable, reassessment in such a case cannot be challenged on the ground of change of opinion. Hence, the underlying principle of these decisions is that a claim wrongly allowed previously could be and should be set right in subsequent assessments and limiting the provisions of section 153A in the manner suggested by the assessee would in fact be a travesty of justice. 5.2 Further, the decision of Hon. Special....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 153A specially when the issue itself finality. 6. From the observations of the Ld. Assessing Officer reproduce above, apparently, no incriminating material was found during the course of search on the basis of which assessment was framed disallowing the claim of the assessee under section 80IA of the Act. The basis of additions apparently may be inferred from the below observations made by Ld. Assessing Officer in the assessment order "Hence, the underlying principle of these decisions is that a claim wrongly allowed previously could be and should be set right in subsequent assessments and limiting the provisions of section 153A in the manner suggested by the assessee would in fact be a travesty of justice.....Since, the original assessment was completed prior to insertion of this explanation the then Assessing Officer did not had the benefit or occasion to examine the claim of the assessee in the light of intention and meaning of the provision as clarified by the said Explanation". Thus, the order passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act was not on the basis of any incriminating material found during the course, but on the basis of revision of order sought to be made on th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar year or in all of the relevant financial years. Therefore, the ground of appeal that the assessments already made cannot be re-opened u/s 153A is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act. After having regard to the rulings of the courts, the provisions of the Act and the facts of the case, this ground of appeal is rejected." 7. A perusal of the contents of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) order seems to suggest that no incriminating material was found during the course of search so as to disallow the claim of the assessee under section 80-IA of the Act. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) in his order has categorically observed that "it is not relevant whether any incriminating was found in any particular order and all of the relevant years. Therefore, ground of appeal that the assessments already made cannot be reopened under section 153A is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act". 8. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee challenged the validity of the assessment framed under section 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during search action undertaken on the assessee, particularly when the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 had attained finali....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jarat High Court in the case of PCIT v. Dipak Jashvantlal Panchal [2017] 88 taxmann.com 611 (Gujarat) held that only undisclosed income and undisclosed assets detected during search can be brought to tax in assessment under section 153A of the Act. In the case of PCIT v. Desai Construction (P.) Ltd. [2017] 81 taxmann.com 271 (Gujarat), the Gujarat High Court held that in absence of any incriminating material found during search, Assessing Officer, in assessment under section 153A, would not be entitled to interfere with assessee's claim for deduction under section 80-IA, which was part of original assessment proceedings and such assessment had abated. The ITAT Rajkot Bench in the case of a Rajat Minerals v. DCIT 114 Taxman.com 536 (Ranchi-Trib) held that where no incriminating evidence against the assessee was found or seized during course of search, invocation of provisions of section 153A and making additions/disallowances on basis of tax evasion petition found much after search was unjustified. The Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Jaypee financial services Ltd 127 Taxman.com 419 (Delhi), held that where AO during the course of post search proceedings under section ....