ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, FARIDABAD V. SOHAN LAL SINGLA, NEW DELHI

ITA 8433/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Faridabad against Sohan Lal Singla concerning the Assessment Year 2012-13. The appeal was directed against the CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon's decision which had deleted an addition of Rs.6,87,75,000 made under section 56(2)(vii)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer following a search operation at the corporate office of the MASPKO Group, alleging that the share premium received by the assessee was at a discount and constituted a colorable transaction. The Tribunal, referencing a similar case and the Supreme Court's decision, found that the addition was not based on any incriminating material and thus upheld the CIT(A)'s decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772083 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MONIKA SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: G.C. SRIVASTAVA; KALRAV MALHOTRA
• Keywords: Fair market value; Document seized
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal, Accountant Member ITA No. 8433/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 ACIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Haryana-121001 Vs Sohan Lal Singla, 31, Punjabi Bagh, West Avenue, New Delhi-121001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEZPS1205E Assessee by : Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Adv. & Sh. Kalrav Malhotra, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.08.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon’s in case No. 347/CIT(A)- 3/GGN/2017-18 dated 14.08.2019, in proceedings u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. The Revenue raises the following “revised” grounds of appeal in the instant case: “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) is right in deleting the addition of Rs.6,87,75,000/- by holding that the said addition is not based on incriminating material whereas such addition is based upon the seized material impounded during the course of search operation at Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 8433/Del/2019 Sohan Lal Singla 2 corporate office of the MASPKO Group i.e. 52, North Avenue Road, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi and inventorised as page No. 100, A-2, UP-1? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the document seized as page No. 100, A-2 seized from the corporate office of the MASPKO Group i.e. 52 North Avenue Road, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi as incriminating in nature despite the enquiry conducted by AO shows that had the document not been seized, the Department would have not known about the actual shareholding of M/s Confident Distributors Pvt. Ltd. in F.Y. 2011-12? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the addition is not based on incriminating material despite the fact that the Assessing Officer elaborately discussed the said incriminating material as well as enquiries conducted in para Nos. 03, 04, 07, 08 & 09 of the assessment order?” 4. Suffice to say, the Revenue’s sole endavour herein is to revive the Assessing Officer’s action making section 56(2)(vii)(c) addition of Rs.6,87,75,000/- thereby holding the assessee’s share premium received at a heavy discount price of Rs.10.- against fair market value of Rs.78.75 per unit; as a colourable transaction, in a section 153A assessment framed in furtherance to the search in question dated 29.12.2015 and reversed the CIT(A)’s findings. 5. That being the case, the assessee has filed this tribunal’s recent learned co-ordinate bench order in connected cases in Revenue’s appeal ITA No. 8435/Del/2019, in case of Sh. Krishan Singla, ITA Nos. 8434, 8432 & 8436/Del/2019 involving Sh. Prem Singla, Sh. Rajeev Singla and Sh. Pankaj Singla; Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 8433/Del/2019 Sohan Lal Singla 3 holding the identical addition has not sustainable in law since not based on any incriminating/seized material, in light of PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) qua the very search. The Revenue is equally fair in not disputing all these intervening developments. We thus adopt judicial consistency to uphold the learned CIT(A)’s lower appellate findings deleting the impugned addition made in the assessee’s hands. Ordered accordingly. 6. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 25/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 25/08/2025 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Printed from counselvise.com "