2023 (2) TMI 970

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....espondent-assessee against order dated 20.05.2019, has been allowed. The case in brief is that on 17.02.2016, a search under Section 132 of Act 1961 was carried out at the premises of Spaze Towers Pvt. Ltd, where books of account are maintained. The respondent was one of the directors of Spaze Towers Pvt. Ltd, and subsequently, a notice under Section 153-A of the Act was issued to him to on 28.11.2016 asking him to file his return of income. In response to the said notice, the respondent filed his return of income for the assessment year 2015-2016 declaring an income of Rs.94,11,350/-. The assessment of the case of the respondent, under Section 153 (1) (B) was completed on 26.12.2017 (A-1) and the Assessing Officer made the following addit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... vide order dated 20.05.2019 confirmed the impugned penalty and dismissed the appeal of the respondent. The respondent then filed an appeal before ITAT and his appeal was allowed on 28.08.2019 (A-5) and it was observed that the Company Spaze Towers Pvt. Ltd was inflating its purchase and cash so generated was spent on the personal needs of the directors/promoters in the form of ceremonial functions, farm house construction etc and in the process nowhere actual cash changed hands, but was spent on personal expenses of promoters/directors. It has further been observed that merely because the petitioners/directors agreed to repay the lability, the same cannot be construed as taking loans from the company and since it had incurred personal exp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vs. R.P. Singh and Co. Pvt. Ltd, 2012 340 ITR 217 wherein the appeal of the revenue was dismissed and the operative para of the judgment reads as under:- "Mr. Kochhar, learned counsel for the assessee, submitted that the said question does not arise in the case at hand inasmuch as both the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal have recorded a finding that once the Assessing Officer has treated it as undisclosed income, it could not have proceeded on the foundation that it is a deposit. In our considered opinion, this submission canvassed by Mr. Kochar has substantial force and the question raised by the Revenue really does not arise in this case. Needless to say that the said question may arise where the facts would be ....