DCIT, Central Circle II, Chandigarh V. M/s NRM Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. , Manimajra

ITA 977/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5305 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 14-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 977 & 978/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006-07 & 2009-10 THE DCIT, VS. M/S NRM PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, SCO 850, SHIVALIK ENCLAVE, CHANDIGARH NAC, MANIMAJRA PAN NO. AAACN1492L ITA NO. 987 /CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 THE DCIT, VS. M/S VRM PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, PLOT NO. 781, INDUSTRIAL ARE A, CHANDIGARH PHASE-II, CHANDIGARH PAN NO. AACCV0891P ITA NO. 985/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 THE DCIT, VS. M/S VKM PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, SCO 850, SHIVALIK ENCLAVE, CHANDIGARH NAC, MANIMAJRA PAN NO. AACCV0892Q ITA NO. 988/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 THE DCIT, VS. M/S SRM PORTFOLIO PVT. LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, SCO 493-494, SECTOR 35-C, CHANDIGARH CHANDIGARH PAN NO. AAJCS1938B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 APPELLANT BY : SH. ALOK KUMAR, CIT DR RESPONDENT BY : SH. VED JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 16.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17. 01.2018 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE CAPTIONED APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE DE PARTMENT AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS), [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)] -3, GURGAON AL L DATED 31.3.2017. 2. SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN ALL THE APPEALS IS I DENTICAL AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN IN ALL THE CAPTIONED APPEAL S ARE ALSO IDENTICAL, THESE HAVE BEEN HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOS ED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE FACTS ARE T AKEN FROM ITA NO. 987/CHD/2017. 3. THOUGH THE NUMBER OF THE GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISE D IN THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE BUT THE DEPARTMENT IS MAINLY A GGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN HOLDING THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MA DE U/S 153A IN RESPECT OF THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT WHEN NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH. 4. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS S UBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THESE APPEALS IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY VARIOUS DECISION OF THE HIGHER COURTS. THE LD. DR, HOWEVER , SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. HOWEVER, WHEN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND THE IMPU GNED ORDER WAS PERUSED, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELET ED THE IMPUGNED 3 ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVING TH AT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH ACTION CARRIE D OUT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THAT THE INCOME TAX RETURNS WERE DULY FIL ED AND THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THERE UPON ALSO STOOD CONCLUDED AND NO ASSESSMENT / RE- ASSESSMENT WAS PENDING. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S MALA BUILDERS PVT LTD VS. ACIT ITA NOS. 433 TO 437/CHD/2014, WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS FURTHER RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE BO MBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MURLI AGRO PRODUCTS PVT LTD, (20 14) 49 TAXMAN.COM 172 (BOM.), ITA NO.36 OF 2009 AND IN THE CASE OF CIT V S. CONTINENTAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION ITA NO. 523 OF 2013 REPORT ED IN (2015) 279 CTR 0389 (BOMBAY) AND ON THE CASE OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA 234 TAXMAN 300 (DELH I) WHEREIN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTS HAVE BEEN UNANIMOUS TO HOLD THA T IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE SEARCH ACTION, WHEN THERE WAS NO PENDING ASSESSMENT WHICH CAN BE SAID TO HAVE ABA TED ON THE DATE OF SEARCH, THE ADDITIONS CANNOT BE MADE. WHEN LD. DR W AS CONFRONTED TO THE ABOVE FINDINGS MADE BY THE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. DR HAS BEEN FAIR ENOUGH TO ADMIT THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND D URING THE SEARCH ACTION AND THAT THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS STOOD COMPLETED ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. HE, HOWEVER, INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO TH E GROUND (XI) TAKEN BY THE REVENUE WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE DEC ISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KABUL CHA WLA (SUPRA) HAS BEEN DISTINGUISHED BY THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF SMT. DAYAWANTI VS. CIT IN ITA 357/2015 & OTHERS DATED 27.10.2016. WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE ABOVE CONTENTION OF THE L D. DR, SINCE THE CASE OF 4 SMT. DAYAWANTI VS. CIT (SUPRA) HAS ALREADY BEEN D ISCUSSED IN THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PRINCIPAL CIT VS. MEETA GUTGUTIA PROP M/S FERNS N PETALS, ITA 306/2017 AND OTHERS DECIDED VIDE ORDER DATED 25.5.2 017. WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT IN THE CASE OF SMT. DAYAWANTI V S. CIT (SUPRA), INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH ACTION, HOWEVER, IN THE CASE OF PRINCIPAL CIT VS. MEETA GUTGUTIA PROP M/S FERNS N PETALS (SUPRA), NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND DURIN G THE SEARCH ACTION, HENCE, THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE NOT JUSTIFIED. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMI TY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. THE A PPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 6. SINCE THE ISSUE FACTS AND ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE OTHER APPEALS OF REVENUE IN ITA NO. 977, 978, 985 & 988/CHD/2017 ARE IDENTICAL, IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION ABOVE, THE SAME ALSO STAND DISMISSE D. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE ARE HEREBY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.01.2018. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 17 TH JANUARY 2018 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR 5