TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 805
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come Tax Act, 1961. 5. On the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,12,500/- made by the AO on account of unexplained commission expenses. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any/all the ground of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 3. It is a search case. Search/seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the "Act") was carried out on 10.03.2015 on Appu Ghar Group of cases. The case of the assessee was also covered under section 132 of the Act. Notice under section 153A of the Act was issued on 20.10.2016. In response thereto, the assessee filed its return on 15.11.2016 for AY 2013-14 declaring income at Rs. Nil. Statutory notices under section 143(2) and under section 142(1) along with questionnaire were issued on 18.11.2016. The assessee filed reply before the Ld. Assessing Officer ("AO") who perused the same and test checked the books of account produced. 4. The Ld. AO completed the assessment on 30.12.2016 under section 153A r.w. 143(3) of the Act on total income of Rs. 3,22,46,500/- including therein addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- being 'unexplained cash credit'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s also the submissions of the Lnd. AR in all the above respective cases/appeals for the above. mentioned assessment years and the only matter considered in the assessments and under challenge is the issue related to holding the share capital/share application /unsecured loan as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act and estimated commission hereon, and in respect of AY 2013-14 in the appeals for M/s R.V. Buildtech & Amusement Pvt. Ltd. and M/s VGRM Infrastructure & Amusement Pvt. Ltd. the appellant has, in ground nos. 02, 04, 05 to 18, also challenged the assessments made u/s 153A of the Act contending that the assessment is not based on any incriminating document found during the search, in ground nos. 06, 07, 09, 10 & 14 the appellant has raised objections against the reliance placed by the AO on the statements of various persons, including the group Chairman Sh. Gian Vijneshwar, which was retracted immediately after the search, without adducing any corroborative evidence, and failure on the part of the AO to provide opportunity for cross-examination of the various persons whose statements have been relied upon by the AO, hence appeals of all these cases for the above mentioned assessment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....v. Appu Ghar Holdings Ltd vi. Appu Ghar Securities and Solutions Pvt Ltd vii. Team Bulldoon Pvt Ltd viii. Appu Ghar Entertainment Pvt Ltd ix. International Amusement Holdings Ltd x. Rainbow Progress Ltd xi. MJ Entertainment Pvt Ltd xii. Kamakshi Marketing Pvt Ltd and admittedly no share certificates of the above 02 companies, Ms RV. Buildtech & Amusement Pvt. Ltd. and M/S VGRM Infrastructure & Amusement Pvt. Ltd, were found and therefore these seized document or not relevant for these 02 companies and cannot be considered as incriminating documents in respect of these 02 companies. 3.1.3.3 Further, in my order in the case of M/s Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. (supra) at para-4.1.3.3 I have held that the documents pages: 24 to 42 of Annx. A-17/M-2 and emall retrieved from computer used by Shri Sukhbir Singh Bawa (Annexure A-52. Party M-2) cannot be considered as incriminating material found during the course of search related to the appellant company. 3.1.3.4 Accordingly, the assessments in both the cases M/s RV. Buildtech & Amusement Pvt. Ltd. and M/s VGRM Infrastructure & Amusement Pvt. Ltd. for the AY 2013-14, being "completed" assessments, are quashed. 3.1.3.5 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the AO reflects total non-application of mind (apparently in the process of copy and paste from another order of the group) in as much as in both these cases no share application money or unsecured loan as observed by the AO has been taken by the two appellants and, in fact, they had advanced money to M/s K.D. Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., another Appu Ghar group company, as is also perceptibly visible from the audited accounts of these two companies where the respective amount of Rs. 1,71,34,000/- and Rs. 1,71,33,000/- are reflected under 'loan and advances under the grouphead 'current assets. The AO has apparently not even bothered to have a look at the audited accounts of these companies before making additions. The additions are ill-founded and baseless and therefore deleted. 3.3.2.3 In respect of M/s M.V. Realtors & Amusement Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2015- 16, the appellant had taken unsecured loan from M/s K.D. Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. (KDCPL) of Rs. 1,71,00,000/-. The basic fact is that the amount received from KDCPL on various dates (Rs 10,00,000/ on 08.03.2013. Rs 84,00,000/- on 11,03.2013 & Rs 77,34,000/- On 14.03.2013) through Kotak Mahindra Bank account no 7811204085 of KDCP....