IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.702/DEL./2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 AND ITA NO.703/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 M/S. MDLR DEVELOPERS & PROMOTORS (P.) LTD., FLAT NO. 4, R.R. APARTMENTS, 3-4, MANGLAPURI, MAHRAULI, NEW DELHI VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-15 (NEW CENTRAL CIRCLE-14), NEW DELHI PAN : AAECM0201 E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: THESE TWO APPEAL HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS, BOTH DATED 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2016 PASSED BY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-XXVI, NEW DELHI [IN SHORT THE LEARNED CIT(A)] PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2005-06 AND 2006-07 RESPECTIVELY. APPELLANT BY SHRI GAUTAM JAIN, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SMT. SUSHMA SINGH, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING 16.03.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17.03.2020 2 ITA NOS. 702 & 703/DEL./2017 2. IN BOTH THE APPEALS, THE ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN COM PLETED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 153A/144/264 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) CONSEQUE NT TO THE SEARCH PROCEEDINGS AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDING, THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS KABU L CHAWLA, 126 DTR 130, DECIDED THE LEGAL ISSUE THAT NO ADDITION C OULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, ON MERIT UPHELD THE CERTAIN ADDITIONS. AGGRIEVED BY THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), BOTH THE REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE CHAL LENGING THE RELIEF ALLOWED ON LEGAL GROUND TO THE ASSESSEE HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISMISSED IN VIEW OF THE LOW TAX EFFECT. HE ALSO SU BMITTED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WHEREIN LEGAL GROUND H AS ALREADY BEEN SETTLED. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE DOES NOT WANT TO PRESS THE MERITS OF THE GROUND AND SOUGHT TO WITHDRAWN THE APPEALS. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LEARNED DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE SAME. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES . IN THESE CASES, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HELD THAT THE ASSESSING O FFICER COULD NOT HAVE PROCEEDED TO FRAME ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 15 3A OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION AS NO INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS/ASSETS HAD BEEN FOUND DURIN G THE SEARCH OPERATION. THE RELEVANT FINDING IN ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2005- 06 IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 3 ITA NOS. 702 & 703/DEL./2017 14. IN VIEW OF ABOVE ANALYSIS OF LEGAL VIEW ON THE ISSUE, THE AO COULDNT HAVE PROCEEDED TO FRAME ASSESSMENT U/S 153 A IN RESPECT OF YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AS NO INCRIMINATING DOCUME NTS/ASSETS HAVE BEEN FOUND DURING SEARCH OPERATION PERTAINING TO THIS YEAR. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL, IS THEREFORE, ALLOWED. 6. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HA S FILED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 671/DE L/2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND ITA NO. 672/DEL/2017 FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 DATED 11.09.2018, WHEREIN T HE TAX EFFECT WAS BELOW RS.20 LAKHS. THE APPEALS OF THE RE VENUE WERE DISMISSED DUE TO LOW TAX EFFECT. THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE RENDERED ACADEMIC ONLY. THE LEARNED COUNSEL SEEKS P ERMISSION FOR THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE APPEALS, FOR WHICH, ENDOR SEMENT HAS BEEN MADE ON THE APPEALS PAPER. WE, THEREFORE, ALL OW THE ASSESSEE TO WITHDRAW THE APPEALS. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH MARCH, 2020. SD/- SD/- ( BHAVNESH SAINI ) ( O.P. KANT ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 17 TH MARCH, 2020. RK/- (D.T.D.S.) COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI