DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA V. SUNRISE INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1364/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, Kolkata, which had allowed the appeal of Sunrise Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. for the assessment year 2014-15. The primary issue was the additions made by the Assessing Officer under sections 68, 69C, and 14A of the Income Tax Act following a search and seizure operation. The CIT(A) reversed these additions, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Pr. CIT Vs. Abhiser Buildwell (P) Ltd., which held that additions made in the preceding year under section 153A are not sustainable if no incriminating material is found during the search. The revenue's appeal was dismissed due to the tax effect being below the prescribed limit, although it was argued that the case fell under an exceptional clause.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469710 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Other Referred Cases: Pr. CIT Vs. Abhiser Buildwell (P) Ltd. [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained expenditure; Tax effect; Search and seizure
• Section: 153A; 68; 131; 69C; 14A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1364/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata Vs. Sunrise Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. (PAN: AAJCS 6240 G) Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 08.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 30.01.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri P. K. Himmatsinghka, A.R For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT Sr. DR ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-26, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 08.03.2022 for AY 2014-15. 2 I.T.A. No. 1364/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sunrise Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 2. On perusal of the registry it appears that the appeal filed by the department after a delay of 40 days, for this, the condonation petition has been filed by the department which is as follows: The Ld. A.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Accordingly, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee being a company filed its return of income for AY 2014-15 declaring total income of Rs. (-) 1,34,836/-. During the search and seizure operation a notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued and the assessment completed u/s 153A/143(3) after making following addition: i) unexplained cash credit u/s 68 Rs. 50,70,000/- 3 I.T.A. No. 1364/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sunrise Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. ii) Unexplained expenditure u/s 69C Rs. 5,070/- iii) Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 60,000/- 4. The said order has been challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been allowed by holding that in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Abhiser Buildwell (P) Ltd. [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC), the addition made in preceding year u/s 153A are not sustainable, Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the revenue has preferred an instant appeal. 5. The Ld. Sr. D.R has submitted that in the present case tax effect is below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT but his case lies under the exceptional clause. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO ignoring the statement given on oath made u/s 131 of the Act as the statement given before the AO was reliable. The Ld. Counsel further submits that there is no definition of incriminating materials rather the incriminating can be in any form such as evident in nature of statement given on oath. 6. Contrary to that, the Ld. A.R submits that present case falls under the tax effect as tax effect in the present case is below is monetary limit prescribed by the CBDT Circular. On the merit it has been argued by the ld. A.R that the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee on the basis of judgment of the Apex Court passed in Pr. CIT Vs. Abhiser Buildwell (P) Ltd. (supra) as there was no incriminating material is unearthed during the search. 7. We have perused the memo of copy as well as order of Ld. CIT(A). It admits of no doubt that the appeal has been filed by the department in which monetary limit is below the prescribed limit i.e. tax effect is Rs. 15,68,197/-. We have gone through the order of Ld. CIT(A) and find that the Ld. CIT(A) clearly discussed the case of the assessee and after that giving a finding which is as follows: 4 I.T.A. No. 1364/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sunrise Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 5 I.T.A. No. 1364/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sunrise Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 6 I.T.A. No. 1364/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sunrise Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. 8. Looking the facts of the case, we also find that in the course of search, a search team has seized loose bunch of loose sheets seized in the respective bunch do not have any incriminating material which would justify the action of addition of share capital subscription Rs. 50,70,000/-. The Ld. CIT(A) has also discussed the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in its order hence needless to reiterate the same. Keeping in view, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed on merit as well as tax effect. 7 I.T.A. No. 1364/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sunrise Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 30th January, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 30th January, 2025 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Kolkata 2. Respondent – Sunrise Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., 67/17, Strand Road, Nimtala, Kolkata-700006 3. Ld. CIT(A)-26, Kolkata 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "