TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1283
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Infravision (P) Ltd. & Shri Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. against the two respective common orders dated 11.01.2023 and 13.01.2023 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi relating to assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. In all these cases, assessment order dated 24.5.2021 has been passed u/s. 153A of the Act. The addition made for all the years is on the basis of notings in a seized diary found from the premises of Kaushalya Residency Girls Hostel, GNHIPL during the course of search u/s. 132 of the Act. AO has made the following additions in two group concerns :- Shri Sai Om Infravision (P) Ltd. S.No. Assessment Year Amount of addition made by AO 1 2014-15 6,44,00,000/- 2 2015-16 1,30,0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rsigned CIT(A) 27.03.2014 Booking of Flat 0.3 Cash -do- The addition is made by the AO 05.07.2014 Booking of Flat 1 Cash -do- The addition is made by the AO in the AY 2015-16 29.03.2017 Booking of Flat 0.32 Cash -do- The addition is made by the AO for AY 2017-18 20.04.2017 Booking of Flat 0.1 Cash -do- The addition is made by the AO for AY 2018-19 Total 1.72 55. The appellant and M/s Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. were equal partners in the project being undertaken at Dehradun. Therefore, the unaccounted income is equally distributed between the two companies. 56. The year wise breakup of the undisclosed b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f accounts are business receipts. However, as no specific ground of appeal on this issue is taken, therefore, the issue remains academic in nature and requires no separate adjudication." 4.1 We may also refer here the relevant findings of the Ld. CIT(A) as under in the case of Shri Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd.. "52. After examination of the data it is seen that the following transactions are not reflected in the books of accounts of either the appellant or the co-developer Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. It is also seen that the amounts are indicated in lakhs. For example 30 indicates Rs. 30 lakhs. This is so because the corresponding entry in the books of accounts is in lakhs. Thus, if there is 100 written in the diary, then....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AY 2015-16 1,00,00,000 50,00,000 50,00,000 AY 2016-17 Nil Nil Nil AY 2017-18 32,00,000 16,00,000 16,00,000 AY 2018-19 10,00,000 5,00,000 5,00,000 56. The year wise unaccounted income u/s. 69A of the appellant company is computed as per the table above. 57. Thus, for the AY 2014-15, addition of Rs. 15,00,000/- is sustained and addition of Rs. 6,29,00,000/- is deleted. 58. Thus, for the AY 2015-16, addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- is sustained and addition of Rs. 80,00,000/- is deleted. 59. Thus, for the AY 2016-17, no addition is sustained and entire addition of Rs. 4,20,00,000/- is deleted. 60. Thus, for the AY 2017-18, addition of Rs. 16,00,000/- is sustai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....further submitted that AO has made addition u/s. 69A of the Act which is not correct course of action. In this regard, he referred the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of M/s D.N. Singh vs. CIT, Central, Patna & Anr. Passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 3738-3739 of 2023 dated 16.5.2023. He further referred the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case Naresh Balyan vs. ACIT decided in ITA 3448/Del/2023 (AY 2017-18) vide order dated 18.12.2024 for the proposition that on the basis of dumb documents, addition cannot be made. 7. Per contra, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and referred the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Namdev Arora vs. CIT, Jallandhar dated 20....