ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NEW DELHI V. TEAM BUILDCON P.LTD, NEW DELHI

ITA 4895/DEL/2017

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A) which had allowed the appeals of Team Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., the respondent, for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. The CIT(A)'s decision was based on a previous ruling in the group case of Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., without independent analysis of the current cases. The Revenue challenged this decision, arguing that the CIT(A)'s order was cryptic and did not address the specific issues raised in the appeals. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue's position, noting the lack of discussion on incriminating material, opportunity for cross-examination, and the reliance on a retracted statement in the CIT(A)'s order. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the matter for a detailed re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706958 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 11 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2017
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell 454 ITR 212 (SC), CIT Vs. Sinhgad Technical Education society, [2017] 84 taxmann.com 290 (S.C), Saksham Commodities Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer [2024] 161 taxmann.com 485 (Delhi)/[2024] 464 ITR 1 (Delhi)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JITENDER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RUCHESH SINHA; RAKESH
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Search and seizure; Opportunity of cross examination
• Section: 143(3); 132; 153A

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 4895 & 4896/Del/2017 ACIT Vs. Team Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4895/Del/2017 (A.Y. 2012-13) ITA No. 4896/Del/2017 (A.Y. 2013-14) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Room No. 363, E-2, ARA Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi Vs M/s Team Buildocn Pvt. Ltd. C-1/9, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi PAN: AACCT4491L Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Ruchesh Sinha, Adv& Dr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv, Ms. Monalsa Maity, Adv Revenue by Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing 02/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 09/07/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: Both the captioned appeals are filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23 (‘Ld. CIT(A) ’ for short), New Delhi dated 12/05/2017pertaining to Assessment Years2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively. 2. A search and seizure operation was carried out u/s 132 of Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) on 10/03/2015 on Appu Ghar Group of cases and the Assessee herein was also covered u/s 132 of the Act. The 2 ITA No. 4895 & 4896/Del/2017 ACIT Vs. Team Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. assessment order came to passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) for Assessment Year 2012-13 and 2013-14 by making certain additions. The assessment orders were called in question by the Assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide combined order dated 12/05/2017 along with other Assessees, allowed the Appeals of the Assessee herein on the ground that the Ld. CIT(A) has considered the issue involved in the Appeal in the order dated 04/05/2017 in the group case of ‘Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd’. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) dated 12/05/2017, the Department of Revenue preferred the present Appeal. 4. The Ld. Department's Representative vehemently submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is cryptic, not decided any of the issues involved in the Appeals independently on its merit and in a vague manner, by mentioning the case of ‘Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd’., allowed the Appeals of the Assessee, which cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeals of the Revenue. 5. Per contra, the Ld. Assessee's Representative by relying on the order of the Ld. CIT(A), submitted that the detailed reasoning has been assigned in the case of Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. for 2011-12 in order dated 04/05/2017, which is similarly placed to the Assessee. However, 3 ITA No. 4895 & 4896/Del/2017 ACIT Vs. Team Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. fairly submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) should have discussed the facts and the merits of the case independently. Further submitted that the additions have been made dehors the incriminating material found during the course of search and the A.O. has not provided opportunity of cross examination of the persons who statements were relied upon by the A.O. while making the addition. Further submitted that the A.O. should not have made the additions based on the retracted statement. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the case of the Assessee is squarely covered with the Judgments of Hon'ble Supreme of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell 454 ITR 212 (SC), CIT Vs. Sinhgad Technical Education society, [2017] 84 taxmann.com 290 (S.C) and Judgments of Jurisdictional High court in the case of Saksham Commodities Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer [2024] 161 taxmann.com 485 (Delhi)/[2024] 464 ITR 1 (Delhi), (SLP of Revenue dismissed 2025] 170 taxmann.com 87 (S.C) [16-12-2024]). Thus, sought for dismissal of the Appeal of the Revenue. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the additions made by the A.O. at the hands of the Assessee on the ground that the Ld. CIT(A) has considered the matter in great detail in its order dated 04/05/2017 in the group 4 ITA No. 4895 & 4896/Del/2017 ACIT Vs. Team Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. cases of Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. and following the same, deleted the additions made in the hands of the Assessee herein. The relevant portion of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:- “3.1.3 The facts of the matter, as mentioned above, have been considered in great detail in my order dt. 04.05.2017 in the group case of SuranaBuildtech Pvt. Ltd. in Appeal Nos. 337 & 338/16-17 for AYs 2011-12 at paras-4.1 to 4.1.9 wherein I have held that \"the AO was not within the jurisdiction bestowed on him by law to make the impugned additions in the assessment u/s 153A of the Act, and therefore the impugned assessment orders for both the assessment years cannot be sustained. It is held accordingly and the reassessment orders for both assessment years are quashed.\" (para-4.1.7). and that, \"no addition could be made without providing opportunity for cross-examination of the persons whose statements were relied upon by the AO make the addition and for this reason as well the addition is not sustainable.\" (para-4.1.5), and that, \"no addition could be made on the basis of a retracted statement and for this reason as well the addition is not sustainable.\" (para-4.1.6), and having considered the facts related to the share application/share capital/unsecured loan in respect of M/s SuranaBuildtech Pvt. Ltd. and all these other cases of the group at paras-4.1.8 to 4.1.8.2 in my order in the case of SuranaBuildtechPvt Ltd. for AYS 2011-12 (supra) I have held that, \"the addition made is not sustainable on merits as well. I hold accordingly.\", and I have deleted the addition in the case of SuranaBuildtechPvt Ltd. for AYs 2011-12 (supra). Following the same the additions in all the above 16 assessments in the group cases listed at page-1 are deleted.” 5 ITA No. 4895 & 4896/Del/2017 ACIT Vs. Team Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. 7. As could be seen from the above, the Ld. CIT(A) has not discussed regarding the ‘incriminating material’ qua the Assessee and qua the Assessment Year under consideration to conclude that the additions made by the A.O. are without incriminating material gathered during the search. The Ld. CIT(A) has also not discussed the issue of not providing opportunity to the Assessee for cross examination of the persons who’s statement were relied upon by the A.O. to make the addition in the hands of the Assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has also not stated anything in its order regarding the evidentiary value of the ‘retracted statement’ which has been made as basis for the addition. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has allowed the Appeals by impliedly borrowing the findings made in the case of Surana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. vide order dated 04/05/2017. We find such approach of the Ld. CIT(A) is not only erroneous but also cryptic. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide all the above three issues in detail qua the facts and qua the documents of the Assessee and pass speaking order in accordance with law. Needless to say, the Assessee shall be provided the opportunity of being heard before passing the order. 6 ITA No. 4895 & 4896/Del/2017 ACIT Vs. Team Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. 8. In the result, Appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 09th JULY , 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 09.07.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "