TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 890
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtaining to Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has originally filed return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act on 31.03.2018 declaring total income at INR 8,82,110/-. A search and seizure action u/s. 132 was conducted on 14.09.2017 at the business and residential premises of the assessee and during the course of search various loose papers were found and seized. Thereafter, proceedings u/s. 153A were initiated in the case of assessee for the year under appeal. The AO observed that during the course of search carried out at the premises of Shri Rajesh Chaudhary and Shri Subhash Chaudhary, who were also covered u/s. 132 of the Act, certain loose papers were found according to which cash expenditure to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....INR 2,70,525/- made on account of unaccounted commission. 7. Heard the contentions of both the parties at length and perused the material available on record. It is observed from the order of AO that three registered Sale Deeds were found from the possession of assessee for which it as explained that assessee was "Sarpanch" and the owners of these properties approached the assessee for getting their revenue records corrected/resolved the disputes between the parties. No paper whatsoever, was found indicating payment of any commission to the assessee or indicating that assessee solicited the deals of such properties as broker. Therefore, Ld.CIT(A) by placing reliance on the judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and accordingly, such addition made is deleted and ground number 6 of the grounds of appeal raised is allowed." 8. From the perusal of the observations, it is observed that Ld.CIT(A) has categorically held that no documents showing the receipt of commission was found as a result of search and only Sale Deed in respect of certain properties were found thus, in absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made on assumptions and presumptions in the order passed u/s. 153A of the Act. Such observations of the Ld.CIT(A) has not been controverted by the Revenue before us, therefore, the order of Ld.CIT(A) to this extent, is hereby, upheld. The ground of appeal No.2 of the revenue is thus, dismissed. 9. Grounds of appeal Nos.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ditions made. The relevant observations of Ld.CIT(A) as contained in para 11.4 to 11.4.3 are as under:- 11.4. "In grounds No. 5, 7 and 8 of appeal, the appellant has contested the addition made of Rs. 2,40,09,447/- in para 3 of the impugned assessment order on account of unexplained cash expenses found recorded in seized document Annexure A-6 found and seized from the residence of Mr Rajesh Choudhry and seized document Annexure A-29 found and seized from the residence of Mr Subhash Choudhry. The appellant has claimed that the AO ignored his submission that the said expenses pertained to and had been owned up by Mr Subhash Choudhry and hence did not pertain to the appellant. He also submitted that Mr Subhash Choudhry had already giv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been informed that: "The issue of unexplained expenditure on which major addition has been made in the impugned assessment order was duly incorporated in Para 4 of the report dated 07.01.2021 of the then Ld. Pr. CIT u/s. 245D(3) of Income Tax Act (copy enclosed). It was explicitly mentioned in the report that some incriminating documents related to Sh. Subhash Chaudhary were seized from premises other than his premises, wherein details of cash expenses & receipts were mentioned. Further, Hon'ble IBS has ordered that no further addition is called for on other issues. Relevant extract of order of the Hon'ble IBS is reproduced hereunder: ........... In respect of other issues discussed in the preceding p....