DCIT, NEW DELHI V. M/S. BPTP INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 3336/DEL/2015

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue's appeals against the CIT(A)'s reversal of the Assessing Officer's additions of unexplained cash credits amounting to Rs. 385,22,00,000 and Rs. 26,78,00,000 for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12, respectively. These additions were initially made following a search operation under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) found the additions to be not sustainable, a decision challenged by the Revenue. The Tribunal, referencing decisions from a coordinate bench and the jurisdictional high court, upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the substantive additions in the assessee's subsidiary's hands had been quashed due to lack of incriminating evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 31425 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT Vs. Electrical and Electronics India Ltd., Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell, Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kabul Chawla
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAVED AKHTAR
• Assessee Lawyers: GAURAV JAIN; AJAY BHAGWANI
• Keywords: Question of law
• Section: 143(3); 68; 69; 153C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No. 3336/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 3337/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Central Circle-32, New Delhi Vs M/s BPTP International Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd., M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAGCA6120N Assessee by : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CA Revenue by : Mr. Javed Akhtar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 30.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 28.02.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These Revenue’s twin appeals i.e. ITA Nos. 3336 & 3337/Del/2015, for A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 arise against the CIT(A)-30, New Delhi’s case Nos. 274/13-14/1425 & 282/13- 14/1433 dated 28.01.2015, in proceedings u/s 143(3)/153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively. 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused. ITA Nos. 3336 & 3337/Del/2015 BPTP International Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. 2 3. It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the Revenue’s instant twin appeals ITA No. 3336 & 3337/Del/2015 for A.Y.s. 2010-11 & 2011-12, seek to revive the Assessing Officer’s action making section 68 unexplained cash credits addition of Rs.385,22,00,000 and Rs.26,78,00,000/-; assessment year wise, respectively, in the course of section 153A assessments arising out of the search in question carried out on 07.12.2010. The CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion has reversed the impugned addition as not sustainable. We make it clear that this identical addition(s) had been made on “substantive” basis in the assessee’s subsidiary M/s Vision Town Planners (P) Ltd.’s hands and on “protective” basis in the instant twin appeals. 4. That being the clinching factual position emerging from the case file, we sought to ascertain the final status of the foregoing substantive addition(s) in the assessee’s subsidiary M/s Vision Town Planners (P) Ltd.’s hands. Learned counsel has placed on record this tribunal’s learned co-ordinate bench’s as many orders dated 13.08.2021 in A.Y. 2010-11 and dated 18.11.2021 in A.Y. 2011-12; respectively, quashing the corresponding assessments for the precise reason that the same was not based on any incriminating material and held in latter ITA Nos. 3336 & 3337/Del/2015 BPTP International Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. 3 A.Y. 2011-12 that the relevant proceedings ought to have been finalized u/s 153C than u/s 143(3) of the Act. 5. Faced with this siutation, we find that pages 75 to 77 in the assessee’s paper book contain hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision in ITA No. 595/2023 PCIT Vs. Electrical and Electronics India Ltd. dated 30.10.2023 deciding the very issue in assessee’s favour and against the department as follows: This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 18.04.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. 2. The Tribunal was called upon to examine the sustainability of the order dated 13.11.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, “CIT(A)”] concerning AYs 2010-11 to 2012-13. 3. On merits, the issue that was raised before the Tribunal was whether the CIT(A) had erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition made under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “Act”], on account of unexplained investments made by the appellant/respondent in the JP Minda Group of companies. 3.1 To be noted, the aggregate amount invested was Rs.4,05,00,000/-. Significantly, the addition in the hands of respondent/assessee was made on a protective basis. The substantive addition had been made in the hands of the JP Minda Group. 4. It is not disputed that insofar as the JP Minda Group is concerned, a challenge was laid before a coordinate bench which was the subject matter of the judgment dated 26.09.2023, concerning a bunch of appeals; the lead appeal being ITA 358/2022, titled Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. M/s JPM Tools Ltd. ITA Nos. 3336 & 3337/Del/2015 BPTP International Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. 4 4.1 In particular, this judgment also covered ITA 360/2022, titled Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. Jay FE Cylinder Ltd. 5. The sum and substance of the judgment dated 26.09.2023 passed by a coordinate bench was that the substantive addition made in the hands of the JP Minda Group was dropped, albeit, on merits. 6. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, correctly points out that the addition was dropped on the basis of a judgment passed by a coordinate Bench of this court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573. 6.1 To be noted, the said judgment has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 481. 7. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant/revenue, having regard to the fact that the substantive addition on merits was dropped. As indicated above, the addition in the hands of the respondent/assessee was only made on a protective basis. 8. In these circumstances, we are of the view that no substantial question of law arises for consideration by this court. The appeal is, accordingly, closed.” 6. We accordingly conclude in light of their lordships foregoing detailed discussion that the impugned identical protective addition(s) hardly have any legs to stand once the corresponding substantive assessments stand quashed in very terms. We accordingly rejected the Revenue’s instant identical substantive ground in both these appeals. Ordered accordingly. ITA Nos. 3336 & 3337/Del/2015 BPTP International Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. 5 7. All other issues in the instant twin appeals stand rendered academic. 8. These Revenue’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 3336 & 3337/Del/2015 are dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 28/02/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (M. Balaganesh) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 28/02/2025 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR "