TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 156
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....)- Rajkot has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition made on account of Contract income not offered for taxation of Rs. 2,57,69,929/-. 2 The learned CIT(A)- Rajkot has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition u/s. 41(1) upto Rs. 8,97,893/- as against the original addition of Rs. 10,21,420/- and thereby granting relief of Rs. 1,23,512/-. 3. The learned CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4 It is, therefore, prayed that the findings given in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be dismissed/deleted and that of the Assessing Officer be restored." Ground No. 1: Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in facts and in law in law in deleting the additions made on account of contract ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax of Rs.1628329/- thereon was deducted at the rate of 2.24%. The total amount of the bills of the contract, as per statement in the TDS certificate including difference amount at the rate of 1.2% of VAT was of Rs.82219019/-. All the the deductions made by the contractee were evident in the copy of the ledger account as reproduced hereinabove. It is appalling that the A.O. grossly failed to apply his mind. He ignored the amount of VAT difference which was clearly mentioned in the TDS certificate itself. It was a case of complete non application of mind to the facts of the case. The contents of the TDS certificates established that the AO was not serious in dealing with the issue under consideration as a part of his duty and made addition wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....High Courts have made the issue very clear that in a case wherein the assessment proceedings were not pending on the date of initiation of the search, no addition can be made which is not related to incriminating seized material and other material gathered by the AO during assessment proceedings which is related to the incriminating material found in the course of search. As mentioned above, the addition was not based on any seized material, therefore, it was not for the AO to make such addition, which can be made in the regular assessment. Thus, on this ground also the appeal of the assessee is allowed." 6. Before us, the Department has not been able to produce any convincing argument to controvert the factual as well as the legal findi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of Kabul Chabla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi High Court) has held that completed assessment can be interfered by the Assessing Officer while making assessment u/s. 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which ware not produced or not already disclosed or made in the course of original assessment. The SLP filed by the Revenue against the above decision of Delhi High Court was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide SLP(C)No.018651/2016.The Gujarat High Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Sunrise Finlease 89 Taxman.com 1 (Gujarat) has held that where no incriminating evidence against assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d certain evidences showing client code modification done by assessee which were not for genuine reasons and, accordingly, made addition on account of such client code modification, since impugned addition was not made by AO based on any incriminating material found during search against assessee and assessment was not pending on date of search, impugned addition was unjustified and same was to be deleted. The Department has not been able to produce any material to suggest / substantiate that the assessment order was passed on the basis of any incriminating material found during the course of search. 8. Therefore, in view of well settled proposition of law that completed assessment can be interfered by the Assessing Officer while making ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITA No. 142/Rjt/2014 vide order dated 29-08-2022 The relevant extracts of the ruling are reproduced below for reference: "5. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted chart dated 20-08-2021 and argued that out of the out total outstanding liability of Rs. 10, 21, 420/-, there was debit balance of Rs. 1,23,512/- against some of the creditors. Thus, after considering the same, the actual liability of the creditors as on 31-03-2007 was of Rs. 8,97,893/-. However, out of the above outstanding balance of Rs. 8,97,893/-, the assessee repaid an amount of Rs. 6,21,182/- back to the creditors in the subsequent years and an amount of Rs. 2,76,726/- was written off in the subsequent period when it was crystallised as the sum was not ....