Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Abhishek Atlani (ITAT Raipur)
Conclusion: Since AO made addition under section 153 on the basis of documents seized in case of third party but without mentioning of assesse’s name in any legal paper and non-establishment of relationship with searched party, therefore, the same was invalid.
Held: AO on the basis of documents seized from the premises of M/s. A Ltd. and its directors which were belonging to assessee initiated proceedings u/s 153C in case of assessee and, thereafter, made addition of Rs.2,61,50496/-. While doing so, he observed that assessee was entitled to receive compensation equivalent to 2,61,50,496/- which was the amount receivable as on 31.03.2006. According to him, the compensation received represented the investments which were not recorded in the books of account of assessee and, therefore, were hit by the provisions of section 69B. It was held the addition was to be deleted on the ground that similar addition had been deleted in the hands of M/s. A Ltd.. Further, AO had not demonstrated the nature of relationship with assessee and M/s. A Ltd.. Since the name of the assessee did not figure out in any official paper and AO did not establish the nexus of assessee with M/s. A Ltd, therefore, addition made in assessee’s case could not be sustained.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
ITA Nos.185 & 186/RPR/2014 filed by the Revenue are directed against the separate orders dated 23.05.2014 of the ld. CIT(A), Raipur (CG) relating to assessment year 2006-07 respectively. ITA No.314/RPR/2014 filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 27.08.2014 of the ld. CIT(A), Raipur (CG) relating to assessment year 2006-07. Since common grounds of appeal have been taken by the Revenue in all these three appeals, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
