Hasan Steel & Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Muzaffarnagar V. ITO, Shamli

ITA 3205/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4156 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHIMA NEB SENIOR
• Assessee Lawyers: S K TANDON
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Gift; Principle of natural justice; Reason to believe; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 131; 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH B : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3205/DEL./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) M/S. HASAN STEEL & ALLOYS PVT. LTD., VS. ITO, WARD 2, C/O GUPTA TAYAL & ASSOCIATES, SHAMLI. 31/50, SOUTH CIVIL LINES, SIDDHARTH COLONY, MUZAFFARNAGAR 251 001 (UP) (PAN : AABCK8737A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.K. TANDON, FCA REVENUE BY : MS. ASHIMA NEB, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 28.11.2017 DATE OF ORDER : 10.01.2018 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT, M/S. HASAN STEEL & ALLOYS PVT. LTD. (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY) BY FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORD ER DATED 25.02.2015 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), MUZAFFARNAGAR QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON TH E GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT :- ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 2 1. THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER WHICH IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED TO SUSTAIN ADDITION OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.24475000/-,985000/-, AND RS.1568498/- ON THE BASIS OF REASSESSMENT PROCEDURE WHEN THE AMOUNTS IN VOLVED WERE NOT THE PART OF REASONS RECORDED AND AMOUNT IN VOLVED IN REASON WAS NOT ADDED AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY RETURN ED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSED ,THEREFORE, THE ADDITION WAS AGAINST THE PROVISION OF SECTION 147. 3. THE CIT A HAS ERRED TO SUSTAIN REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT U/S147 BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 148 DATED 1 7-1-2013 AS THERE WAS NO ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME OF RS 59500000 WHEN IT WAS NOT ADDED BY THE AO WHILE DOING RE- ASSESSME NT AS ORIGINALLY RETURNED AND ASSESSED, THEREFORE, REOPEN ING PERSE WAS BAD IN LAW AND NOTICE ISSUED U/S148 WAS INVALID . 4. THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY APPELLANT WERE DISPOSED OFF WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND WITHOUT ANY SPEAKIN G ORDER AND FACTS ON RECORD, THEREFORE, REASSESSMENT WAS AG AINST THE LAW. 5. THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED TO SUSTAIN ADDITION OF RS 24475000/- UNDER SECTION 68 NOT BASED ON FACTS ON R ECORDS AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY NOT CONFRONTING ANY MATERIAL COLLECTED AT THE BACK OF A SSESSEE, AND ALLOWING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE. 6. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED TO SUSTAIN ADDITION OF RS.985000 AS FREIGHT EXPENSES ON ESTIMATED BASIS ,N OT BASED ON RECORDS AND SUBMISSION PROVIDED, BASED ON CONJEC TURES AND ASSUMPTIONS. 7. THE CIT( A) HAS ERRED TO SUSTAIN ADDITION OF EXP ENSES OF RS.1568498 ON ACCOUNT OF NON PAYMENT OF TDS, NOT BASED ON FACTS, BY IGNORING THE PAYMENT OF TDS BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN AND BY WRONGLY STATING THA T CHALLANS SUBMITTED DO NOT PERTAIN TO THOSE EXPENSES. 8. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS IGNORED THE JURISDICTIONAL H IGH COURT DECISIONS. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 3 INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) WERE INI TIATED ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM DDIT (INV.)-II, GURGAON (HARYANA); THAT DURING THE POST SEARCH INQUIRIES AN D EXAMINATION OF SEIZED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M/S. YORK HOTELS PVT. LT D., AN ENTITY OF M/S. ABW GROUP, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE SAID CONCER N HAS GIVEN/ CREDIT CONSIDERATION/ OTHER AMOUNT OF RS.5,95,00,00 0/- TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO REDUCE ITS TAX LIABILITY AND CO NSEQUENTLY, NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED ON 17.01.2013. ASSESSEE COMPANY PREFERRED TO TREAT HIS RETURN FILED ON 30.09.2009 A S ITS REPLY TO THE NOTICE U/S 148. BUT, SUBSEQUENTLY ASSESSEE COMPANY RAISED OBJECTION FOR ISSUANCE OF NOTICE ON 20.06.2013 THAT INCOME OF RS.5,95,00,000/- EARNED FROM M/S. YORK HOTELS PVT. LTD. HAS BEEN DULY DECLARED UNDER THE HEAD OTHER INCOME IN THE RETURN OF INCOME E-FILED WITH DEPARTMENT ON 30.09.2009 AND AS SUCH, THE SAID INCOME HAS NOT ESCAPED ASSESSMENT NOR THE ASSE SSEE COMPANY HAS OMITTED TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIA L FACTS NECESSARY FOR ASSESSMENT. 3. AO NOTICED FROM THE BALANCE SHEET THAT THE ASSES SEE COMPANY HAS SHOWN TOTAL SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF RS.3,95,00,000/- OUT OF WHICH HE HAS RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF RS.2,70,00,000/- DURING THE YEAR UNDER ASS ESSMENT. AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 131 TO 84 PERSONS OUT OF TOTAL 10 8 PERSONS TO ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 4 CONFIRM THE BALANCES OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY; OU T OF WHICH 21 PERSONS APPEARED. OUT OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT, DUR ING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE COMPANY RECEIVED RS.2,70,00,000/- IN THE S HARE APPLICATION AND THE SAID 21 PERSONS HAVE INVESTED T OTAL OF RS.53,75,000/- IN THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND G IVEN THE DETAILS IN THE TABULATED FORM. AO NOTICED THAT ALL THE AFO RESAID PERSONS ARE AGRICULTURISTS HAVING NO SOURCE OF INCOME EXCEPT TH E AGRICULTURE AND HAVE GIVEN THE AMOUNT IN CASH ONLY AND DISBELIE VED THEIR STATEMENT AS THEY ARE HAVING MEAGER LAND HOLDING AN D CONSEQUENTLY MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.244,75,000/-. 4. AO FURTHER NOTICED FORM P&L ACCOUNT THAT THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY HAS DEBITED FREIGHT EXPENSES OF RS.1,97,00, 015/-. ON FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO FILE ALL THE BIL LS/VOUCHERS, THE AO DISALLOWED 5% OF AFORESAID EXPENSES AND MADE ADD ITION OF RS.9,85,000/-. AO FURTHER NOTICED FROM THE AUDIT R EPORT ON FORM NO.3CD THAT IN COLUMN NO.17F, THE AUDITOR HAVE MARK ED INADMISSIBLE EXPENSES OF RS.48,58,716/- U/S 40(A) B UT, IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS ADD ED INADMISSIBLE EXPENSES AT RS.32,90,218/- AND THEREBY MADE AN ADDITION OF INADMISSIBLE EXPENSES OF RS.15,68,498/- . 5. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BY WAY OF FILING APP EAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL. FEELI NG AGGRIEVED, ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 5 THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L BY CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT (A ) . 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 7. UNDISPUTEDLY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED VIDE N OTICE DATED 17.01.2013 BY RECORDING REASONS DATED 14.01.2 013 THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX OF RS.5,95,00,000/- HAS ES CAPED ASSESSMENT BY OMISSION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSA RY FOR ASSESSMENT. FOR READY PERUSAL, REASONS RECORDED, AVAILABLE AT P AGE 2 OF THE PAPER BOOK, ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- M/S HASAN STEELS & ALLOYS (P) LTD. MOH-ALDERMIYAN KAIRANA, DISTT. SHAMLI. A.Y. 2009-10, PAN AABCK8737A DATE: 14.01.2013 IN THIS CASE, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INV)-II , GURGAON WHEREIN IT WAS STATED THAT M/S YORK HOTELS PVT. LTD., WHICH IS AN ENTITY OF M/S ABW GROUP HAS GIVEN/CREDITED COMPENSATIONS/OTHER AMOUNT TO THE AS SESSEE TO THE TUNE OF RS.5,95,00,000/-. INVESTIGATION IN THIS MATTER INDICATED TO PRIMA FACIE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 6 PROVIDED ENTRIES TO THE ABW GROUP FOR REDUCING THE TAX LIABILITY OF VARIOUS CONCERNS OF ABW GROUP. RELYING UPON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE AUTHORITY MENTIONED ABOVE, IT IS MANDATORY TO FURTH ER INVESTIGATE AND ENQUIRE ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF RS.5,95,00,000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S YORK HOTELS PVT. LTD. SO THAT IT MAY BE FIND OUT WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENT RIES TO VARIOUS ENTITIES OF M/S ABW GROUP. CONSIDERING THE INFORMATION RECEIVED, I HAVE, THEREFORE, REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT THE INCOME CHARG EABLE TO TAX TO THE EXTENT OF RS.5,,95,00,000/- HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT BY OMISSION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR ASSESSMENT. NOTICE U/S 148 FOR A.Y. 2009-10 TO ASSESS THE SAME IS ISSUED ACCORDINGLY. SD/- (K.P. ANURAG) INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SHAMLI 8. UNDISPUTEDLY, NO ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A O DURING THE REASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF REASONS RECORDED T HAT, M/S. YORK HOTELS PVT. LTD., WHICH IS AN ENTITY OF M/S. ABW GR OUP, HAS GIVEN/ CREDITED COMPENSATIONS/OTHER AMOUNT TO THE ASSESSEE TO THE TUNE OF RS.5,95,00,000/-. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ORIGINAL RETURN WAS FILED ON 30.09.2009 AND REOPENING WAS MADE ON 1 4.01.2013 I.E. AFTER A PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT DETAILED OBJECTIONS WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE COMP ANY ON 20.06.2013 FOR THE PROPOSED REASSESSMENT WHICH WAS DISPOSED OFF ON 16.09.2013. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTEND ED THAT WITHOUT ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 7 DECIDING THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY T HAT INCOME OF RS.5,95,00,000/- EARNED FROM M/S. YORK HOTELS PVT. LTD. HAS BEEN FULLY DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY UNDER THE HE AD OTHER INCOME IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 30.09.2009 , THE NOTICE IS BAD IN LAW AND IS LIABLE TO BE DROPPED IN LIMINE. 9. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT AFTER REOPENING, NO ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AO QUA THE ALLEGED ESCAPED INCOME OF RS.5,95,00,000/- RATHER ADDITIONS OF RS.2,44,75,000 /-, RS.9,85,000/- & RS.15,68,498/- HAS BEEN MADE ON ACC OUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED FROM DIFFERENT INVESTORS ; 5% OF THE FREIGHT EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY & BALANCE OF INADMISSIBLE EXPENSES RESPECTIVELY. 10. LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE COMPANY CONTENDED THAT WHEN THE AO HAS FAILED TO MAKE ADDITION DURING REASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF REASONS RECORDED, THE REASONS DO NOT SURVIVE AND AS SUCH, AO WAS NOT PERMITTED TO MAKE OTHER ADDITIONS WHEN THE VERY REASON OF INITIATION OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE CEASED TO SURV IVE. 11. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES OF THE CASE, NOW THE SOLE QUESTION ARISES FOR DETERMIN ATION IN THIS CASE IS :- AS TO WHETHER OTHER ADDITIONS MADE BY AO OF RS.2,44,75,000/-, RS.9,85,000/- & RS.15,68,498/- ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED FROM DIFFERENT ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 8 INVESTORS, 5% OF THE FREIGHT EXPENSES CLAIMED BY TH E ASSESSEE COMPANY & BALANCE OF INADMISSIBLE EXPENSES RESPECTI VELY IS SUSTAINABLE WHEN REASONS FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDI NGS U/S 147 HAVE CEASED TO SURVIVE? 12. UNDISPUTEDLY, AFTER FILING OF THE OBJECTIONS BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO THE PROPOSAL FOR REOPENING AVAILABLE AT PAGE 5 OF THE PAPER BOOK, THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY ENQUIRY/INVESTI GATION AS TO THE INCOME OF RS.5,95,00,000/- EARNED FROM M/S. YOR K HOTELS PVT. LTD. AND HAS IMPLIEDLY ADMITTED THE CONTENTION OF T HE ASSESSEE COMPANY. HOWEVER, THE AO HAD PROCEEDED TO MAKE REA SSESSMENT BY SCRUTINIZING THE BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT & LOSS AC COUNT AND AUDIT REPORT WHICH WERE NEVER SUBJECT MATTER OF THE REASO NS RECORDED FOR REOPENING. 13. HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN CASE OF RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. VS. CIT 336 ITR 136 (DEL.) HAS DEALT WITH THE IDENTICAL ISSUE AND HAS HELD THAT, AO HAD JURISDICTION TO REASSESS INCOME OTHER THAN THE INCOME IN RESPECT OF WHICH PR OCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 147 WERE INITIATED BUT HE WAS NOT JUS TIFIED IN DOING SO WHEN THE VERY REASONS FOR INITIATION OF THOSE PR OCEEDINGS CEASED TO SURVIVE. FOR FACILITY OF REFERENCE, OPERATIVE PART OF THE JUDGMENT IS REPRODUCED ASUNDER FOR READY PERUSAL :- REASSESSMENT-SCOPE-ISSUE NOT SUBJECT-MATTER OF NOT ICE UNDER S. 148-AS PER EXPLN. 3 TO S. 147, AO MAY ASSE SS OR REASSESS ANY INCOME WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IF SUCH INCOME COMES TO HIS NOTICE IN THE COURSE OF PROCEED INGS ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 9 UNDER THIS SECTION EVEN THOUGH THE SAID ISSUE DOES NOT FIND MENTION IN THE REASONS RECORDED AND THE NOTICE ISSU ED UNDER S. 148-HOWEVER, LEGISLATURE CANNOT BE PRESUMED TO H AVE INTENDED TO GIVE BLANKET POWERS TO THE AO THAT ON A SSUMING JURISDICTION UNDER S. 147, HE CAN KEEP ON MAKING RO VING ENQUIRY AND THEREBY INCLUDING DIFFERENT ITEMS OF IN COME NOT CONNECTED OR RELATED WITH THE REASONS TO BELIEVE ON THE BASIS OF WHICH HE ASSUMED JURISDICTION-HE WOULD BE REQUIR ED TO ISSUE A FRESH NOTICE UNDER S. 148 FOR EVERY NEW ISS UE COMING BEFORE HIM DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT OR REASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH HE INTENDS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT-I N THE INSTANT CASE, VERY BASIS OF INITIATION OF PROCEEDIN GS FOR WHICH REASONS TO BELIEVE WERE RECORDED WERE INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT IN RESPECT OF ITEMS OF CLUB FEE S, GIFTS AND PRESENTS, ETC., BUT THE SAME HAVING NOT BEEN DO NE, THE AO PROCEEDED TO REDUCE THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SS. 80HH AND 80-1 WHICH WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE':''AO HAD JURISDICTION TO REASSESS INCOME OTHER THAN THE INCO ME IN RESPECT OF WHICH PROCEEDINGS UNDER S. 147 WERE INIT IATED BUT HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DOING SO WHEN THE VERY REAS ONS FOR INITIATION OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS CEASED TO SURVIVE 14. SIMILARLY, DEALING WITH THE IDENTICAL ISSUE, HO NBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN CIT VS. JET AIRWAYS 331 ITR 236 HELD THAT, WHEN AFTER THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE CONTENTIONS BY TH E ASSESSEE THAT INCOME HAS NOT ESCAPED ASSESSMENT WHICH WAS SUBJECT MATTER OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148, IT IS NOT OPEN TO AO TO INDEPENDENTLY ASSESS SOME OTHER INCOME, FOR WHICH HE IS REQUIRED TO ISSUE FRESH NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148. FOR READY PERUSAL, OPERATIVE PART OF THE JUDGMENT IN CASE OF CIT VS. JET AIRWAYS (SUPRA) IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER :- REASSESSMENT-SCOPE-ITEMS UNCONNECTED WITH ESCAPEME NT FOR WHICH NOTICE WAS ISSUED-WHEN EXPLN. 3 TO S. 147 WAS INTRODUCED, PARLIAMENT STEPPED IN TO CORRECT WHAT I T REGARDED AS AN INTERPRETATIONAL ERROR IN THE VIEW W HICH WAS TAKEN BY CERTAIN COURTS THAT THE AO HAS TO RESTRICT THE ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 10 ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ONLY TO THE ISSUES IN RESPECT OF WHICH REASONS WERE RECORDED FOR REOPENIN G THE ASSESSMENT-HOWEVER, EXPLN. 3 DOES NOT AND CANNOT OV ERRIDE THE NECESSITY OF FULFILLING THE CONDITIONS SET OUT IN THE SUBSTANTIVE PART OF S. 147-AO HAS TO ASSESS OR REAS SESS THE INCOME ('SUCH INCOME') WHICH ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND WHICH WAS THE BASIS OF THE FORMATION OF BELIEF AND IF HE DOES SO, HE CAN ALSO ASSESS OR REASSESS ANY OTHER INCOME WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND WHICH COMES TO HIS NOTIC E DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS-HOWEVER, IF AF TER ISSUING A NOTICE UNDER S. 148, HE ACCEPTED THE CONT ENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND HOLDS THAT THE INCOME WHICH HE HAS INITIALLY FORMED A REASON TO BELIEVE HAD ESCAPED AS SESSMENT, HAS AS A MATTER OF FACT NOT ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, IT IS NOT OPEN TO HIM TO INDEPENDENTLY ASSESS SOME OTHER INCOME-IF HE INTENDS TO DO SO, A FRESH NOTICE UNDER S. 148 WOULD BE NECESSARY, THE LEGALITY OF WHICH WOULD BE TESTED IN THE EVENT OF A CHALLENGE BY THE ASSESSEE 15. HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT HAS AGAIN DEALT WITH T HE IDENTICAL ISSUE IN CIT VS. ADHUNIK NIRYAT ISPAT LTD. (2011) 63 DTR 2 12 AND HELD THAT, SINCE GROUNDS FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT DO NOT EXIST ANY LONGER AND NO ADDITIONS WERE ULTIMATELY M ADE ON THAT GROUND, THE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF OTHER ITEMS WHI CH WERE NOT PART OF THE REASONS TO BELIEVE CANNOT BE MADE. 16. FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS RENDERED BY HONBLE HIG H COURT CASE CITED AS RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD., JET AIRWAYS AND ADHUNIK NIRYAT ISPAT LTD. (SUPRA), WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT WHEN THE AO HAS IMPLIEDLY ACCEPTED THE CONTENT ION OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY THAT THE INCOME OF RS.5,95,00,000/ - EARNED FROM M/S. YORK HOTELS PVT. LTD. HAS BEEN FULLY DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF ITA NO.3205/DEL/2015 11 INCOME, HE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO ASSESS SOME OTHER IN COME FOR WHICH NO REASONS, HAVE BEEN RECORDED, EVEN IF ESCAPED A SSESSMENT. THE AO IS EMPOWERED TO DO SO ONLY AFTER ISSUING A F RESH NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT. SO, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT, WHEN VERY REASONS TO BELIEVE HAVE CEASED TO EXIST THE OTHER ADDITIONS MADE BY TH E AO WHICH HAVE NEVER BEEN THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE NOTICE U/ S 148 ARE NOT LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS HEREBY ALLOWED AND ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT (A) ARE ORDERED TO BE DELETED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 10 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 10 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.