M/S. EXHIBITS INDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA V. A.C.I.T., CC-4(1), KOLKATA

ITSSA 142/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Exhibits India Private Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata, concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) based on incriminating materials found during a search operation under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that no incriminating material was found that could justify the addition, especially since the assessment was unabated at the time of the search. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd., agreed with the assessee and directed the deletion of the addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713033 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJA SENGUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: JYOTI DUGGAR
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 153A; 40A(3); 133A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM IT(SS)A No.142/KOL/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Exhibits India Private Ltd. P-496, Keyatala Road, Kolkata-700029, West Bengal Vs. Asst. Commissioner of income Tax, Central Circle 4(1), Aaykar Bhavan,110, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AABCE1359C Assessee by : Shri Jyoti Duggar, AR Revenue by : Shri Raja Sengupta, DR Date of hearing: 17.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 30.07.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27 (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 09.09.2024 for the AY 2017-18. 02. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 19 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reason for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. A.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the submission made by the A.R. and we are of the view that the cause stated is reasonable and hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 IT(SS)A No.142/KOL/2024 M/s Exhibits India Pvt. ltd.; A.Y. 2017-18 03. The only issue raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT (A) not considering the fact that no incriminating material was found during the course of search u/s 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and therefore, the addition made by the ld. AO is without jurisdiction in the assessment framed u/s 143(3)/ 153A of the Act in the case of unabated assessment. 04. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30.10.2017, declaring total income at ₹48,89,450/-. A search u/s 132(1) of the Act and survey u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on 10.02.2021 and subsequent dates in the Genesis group of cases, who is engaged in the business of advertising and media. Since, the assessee is a related entity, was also covered in the said search. Notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee which was duly complied with by the assessee filing the return of income on 29.10.2021, declaring total income at ₹48,89,450/-. Thereafter, during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noted that certain incriminating materials found in 2nd Floor, Block-B, 227 AJC Bose Road, Kolkata -700020 and according documents , backup of computers and other digital devices containing Books of Accounts of the assessee were inventorised and impounded. In External Hard disk bearing ID mark GAPL/HD/1, GAPL/HD/2 and GAPL/HD/3, there were evidences of cash payments by the assessee. Thereafter, the ld. AO noted that after analyzing the cash payments it was found that the assessee was paid total payment of ₹2,73,603/- in violation of Provision of Section 40A(3) of the Act and finally, made an addition of ₹96,496/- to the income of the assessee, in the assessment framed u/s 153A of the Act dated 06.03.2022, which was also confirmed by the ld. CIT (A). Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 IT(SS)A No.142/KOL/2024 M/s Exhibits India Pvt. ltd.; A.Y. 2017-18 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that undisputedly the impugned assessment is a unabated assessment on the date of search. We note that the time limit for issuing the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act has already expired and therefore, no assessment was not pending on the date of search. In such scenario, the ld. AO cannot make addition in the assessment farmed unless and until, there is an incriminating seized material to back such addition. The case of the assessee is squarely covered in the case of PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. (2023)454 ITR 212(SC). Consequently, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT (A) and direct the ld. AO to delete the addition. 06. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 30.07.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com "