Case Law Details
Shri Amit Arora Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
The issue under consideration is whether the assessment u/s 153A can be considered as valid if no incriminating material found during the course of search?
ITAT states that, it is apparent that between the two judgments of Kabul Chawla (supra) and Dayawanti (supra), the facts and circumstances of the instant case are fully covered by the ratio in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), which view has been reiterated by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in a more recent decision in Principal CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Del). In view of the foregoing discussion, ITAT agree with the view canvassed by the ld. JM in holding that the amount of determined loss for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 be allowed to be carried forward for set off against the income for the assessment year 2006-07. The question proposed is, therefore, answered in negative by holding that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the additions made by the AO for the years of completed assessments, which were not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search relating to such years and consequently denying the benefit of carry forward and set off of the resultant loss in subsequent year. Hence, by respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla vs. CIT (supra) and order of ITAT, Delhi in the case of H.B.N. Dairies & Allied (supra); ITAT also decide the issue in favour of the assessee, in the present appeal before us. Accordingly, the aforesaid additions stand deleted.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
(A) This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the impugned appellate order dated 01.04.2015 passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”,for short] pertaining to Assessment Year 2006-07, on the following grounds:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
