DCIT Vs Bharathi Consumer Care Products Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Visakhapatnam)
In the instant case there was no evidence found in the premises of the assessee to show that the assessee is under invoicing the sales. No other material was found and seized from the premises of the assessee with regard to receipt of cash from the distributors. No evidence was found in the premises of the distributors also to establish that that the assessee was paid unaccounted cash by the distributors. The AO could not rebut the submissions of the assessee with regard to sale price and under invoicing with relevant facts and evidences. Therefore we, hold that the additions made solely on the basis of statement u/s 132(4) without having corroborating evidence is unsustainable and accordingly we uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeals of the revenue for the A.Ys 2013-14 to 2016-17 on this issue.
In completed assessments the AO is not permitted to make additions without having the seized material / incriminating material
The next issue in this case is validity of making additions u/sec. 153A without having seized material. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition holding that the AO is not permitted to make the addition without having seized material. In search cases once the assessment is completed or unabated the assessing officer is not permitted to make the additions without having the seized material. The Ld. CIT(A) followed the decision of this tribunal as well as the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of A.M.R. India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and deleted the additions. We have deleted the entire addition on merits, hence, the issue is only of academic interest.+
