Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: VAT Audit :: due date for vat payment :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: empanelment :: form 3cd :: VAT RATES :: TDS
 
 
From the Courts »
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21
 CHAUDHARY SKIN TRADING COMPANY Vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-21
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 Deputy Director Of Income Tax Vs. Virage Logic International
 Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 International Taxation Vs. Virage Logic International India
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-06 Vs. Moderate Leasing And Capital Services Pvt. Ltd.
 ITO vs. Vikram A. Pradhan (ITAT Mumbai)

Mrs. Maniben Chhadwa 602/B, 3rd Floor, Captain House, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Matunga (CR), Mumbai-400 019 Vs. Asst. CIT, Central Circle-8, Mumbai
March, 13th 2015
                    ""   
     IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH, MUMBAI

      . .  ,       ,                                      
      BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JM

                     ./I.T.A. No. 8574/Mum/2010
                    (   / Assessment Year: 2003-04)

Mrs. Maniben Chhadwa                               Asst. CIT, Central Circle-8,
602/B, 3rd Floor, Captain House,                   Mumbai
Dr. Ambedkar Road, Matunga (CR),          /
Mumbai-400 019                            Vs.


     . /  . /PAN/GIR No. AACPC 9095 K
         ( /Appellant)                       :            (     / Respondent)

         / Appellant by                      :    Shri Vijay Mehta

          /Respondent by                     :    Shri S. J. Singh


                         /                   :    13.01.2015
                   Date of Hearing
                      /
                                             :    11.03.2015
           Date of Pronouncement

                                    / O R D E R
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member :

      The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the ld.
CIT(A) dated 14.09.2010. The assessee inter alia has contested the validity of the
additions made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) pursuant to the assessment u/s.143(3) r/w
s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (`the Act' hereinafter).

2.    The facts in brief are that a search and seizure action u/s. 132(1) of the Act was
carried out in the group cases of M/s. Sea Lifestyles Pvt. Ltd. including residential
                                            2
                                                  ITA No. 8574/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2003-04)
                                                          Mrs. Maniben Chhadwa vs. Asst. CIT

premises of the assessee on 11.04.2007. Notice u/s.153A was issued and served upon the
assessee and thereafter the reassessment was done u/s.143(3) r/w s. 153A of the Act. The
A.O. added a sum of Rs.13,08,326/- being gift received by the assessee by way of SBI
Resurgent India Bonds worth US # 20,000/- from one Mr. Minesh Shah. The assessee
had contended before the ld. CIT(A) that the above said addition was not based upon any
incriminating material found during the course of search and that the reassessment of
already concluded assessment in the absence of any incriminating material could not be
done under law. However, the said contention of the assessee was rejected. The A.O. held
that the assessee could not prove with cogent and convincing evidence, the receipt of the
said amount of Rs.13,08,326/- and made the addition u/s.68 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A)
also confirmed the addition so made by the A.O. The assessee has thus came in appeal
before us.




3.     At the outset, the ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that no incriminating
material was found during the search action, hence the reassessment in this case of the
already concluded assessment was not valid. He has also relied upon the decision of the
tribunal in the case of family member of the assessee, namely Mrs. Rakesha Chaddwa,
wherein the additions were made on identical facts and pursuant to the same search action
and also in respect of the gift of SBI Resurgent India Bonds, valuing at Rs.6,54,138/-. He
has contended that the tribunal in the case of family member of the assessee, on identical
facts and in relation to the same search action has deleted the addition on the ground that
no incriminating material was found against the assessee during the search action.

4.     We have gone through the decision of the tribunal passed in ITA Nos. 8576 and
8577/Mum/2010 order dated 17.10.2014. The tribunal on the identical facts has deleted
the addition in the case of family member of the assessee Mrs. Rakesha Chaddwa,
observing as under:

       `5.   We have heard the rival contentions and carefully perused the record. There
       is no dispute with regard to the fact that both the assessment years under
       consideration fall in the category of "concluded assessments". In the various case
                                      3
                                            ITA No. 8574/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2003-04)
                                                    Mrs. Maniben Chhadwa vs. Asst. CIT

law relied upon by the Id. AR of the Assessee, it has been held that the AO would
be entitled to make any addition in the case of concluded assessments only on the
basis of incriminating materials found during the course of search, since the
concluded assessments do not abate by virtue of section 153A of the Act. The said
view is also supported by the decision of Mumbai Special bench of IT AT
rendered in the case of All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd (ITA NO.5108 to
5022/Mum/2010 dated 06-07-2012). Further, in the case of Shri Govind Agarwal
(supra) relied upon by the assessee, we notice that the Tribunal has placed reliance
on the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai
Steel (India), Jodhpur Vis ACIT [2013] 36 taxmann.com 523, wherein the Hon'ble
Rajasthan High Court has held that "in case, nothing incriminating is found on
account of such search or requisition, then the question of reassessment of the
concluded assessments does not arise, which would require more reiteration and it
is only in the context of the abated assessment under second proviso which is
required to be assessed". For the sake of convenience, we extract below the
relevant observations made by the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case
of Shri Govind Agarwal (supra):
       "17. Rajasthan High Court judgment in the case of Jai Steel (India) (supra),
       vide para 18, it is categorically mentioned that "the requirement of
       assessment or reassessment under the said section (153A) has to be read in
       the context of sections 132 or 132A of the Act, inasmuch as, in case
       nothing incriminating is found on account of search or requisition, then the
       question of reassessment of the concluded assessments does not arise,
       which would more reiteration ...........". Thus, the judgment of Hon'ble
       High court in the case of Jai Steel Ltd, supra and above decisions of the
       Tribunal are categorical in concluding that, in case of the concluded
       assessments like the present one, the additions are made only based on the
       incriminating material discovered during the search action. he facts of the
       Jai Steel Ltd (supra) are identical to the present one i.e., AO made additions
       by reassessing u/s 153A on the completed assessment u/s 143(1) of the Act.
       Thus, considering the judgment in the case of the Jai Steel Ltd (supra), the
       arguments on the legal issue raised before us stands covered. Therefore,
       considering the Rajasthan High Court's judgment in the case of Jai Steels
       Ltd, supra, we have no difficulty in (i) upholding the issue of notice u/s
       153A of the Act and (2) in disapproving the making of the impugned
       additions u/s 68 and 14A of the Act, which are not backed by the
       incriminating materials. In the absence of incriminating material, the role of
       the AO is only to reiterate the returned income filed in response to the
       notice u/s 153A of the Act. Accordingly, in substance, the common legal
       issue raised in the grounds for both the appeals of the assessee (ITA Nos.
       3389 & 3390/M/2011) is allowed"
                                              4
                                                    ITA No. 8574/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2003-04)
                                                            Mrs. Maniben Chhadwa vs. Asst. CIT

       6.     In the instant cases also, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the
       additions made by the AO in assessment years 2003-04 and 2005-06 are not based
       upon any incriminating material found during the course of search. Further, both
       the above said assessment years fall in the category of concluded assessments.
       Hence, by following the consistent view taken by the various benches of Tribunal,
       we hold that the impugned additions made in both the years under consideration
       are liable to be deleted. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the Id.
       CIT(A) in both the years and direct the AO to delete the impugned additions made
       in both the years.

       7.     In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.'




5.     The facts of the case in hand are identical. Additions in this case have also been
made in relation to gift of SBI Resurgent India Bonds for the identical reasons.
Admittedly no incriminating material was found during the search action against the
assessee. Hence, the reassessment in this case in the absence of any incriminating
material legally could not have been done of the already concluded assessment. Being in
agreement and respectfully following the decision of the tribunal on identical facts in the
case of family member of the assessee, we do not find any justification in the action of
the lower authorities in making the impugned additions. The reassessment in this case is
held to be invalid and the same is set aside. The additions so made pursuant to the
reassessment u/s.153A in this case are, therefore, ordered to be deleted.

6.     In the result, the assessee's appeal is hereby allowed.
                 
                 Order pronounced in the open court on March 11, 2015

            Sd/-                                          Sd/-
      (B. R. Baskaran)                                 (Sanjay Garg)
        / Accountant Member                              / Judicial Member

 Mumbai;  Dated : 11.03.2015

. ../Roshani, Sr. PS
                             5
                                 ITA No. 8574/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2003-04)
                                         Mrs. Maniben Chhadwa vs. Asst. CIT



         /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.  / The Respondent
3.     () / The CIT(A)
4.      / CIT - concerned
5.           ,     ,   / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6.     / Guard File
                                   / BY ORDER,



                             /  (Dy./Asstt. Registrar)
                            ,  / ITAT, Mumbai

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
SEO Company Search Engine Optimization Company US SEO Local SEO Company Website SEO Company Alabama SEO Company Alaska SEO Company Arizona SEO Company Arkansas SEO Company California SEO Company Colorado SEO Company Connecticut SEO Company Delawa

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions