ITA No.7750/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Search and seizure operation was carried out under section 132 of the Act at the business premises of Tinna Group of companies on 11/11/2010. During the course of the search, certain documents were found and seized belonging to the assessee company. Thereafter, based on the materials seized belonging to the assessee after recording satisfaction for initiation of proceedings under section 153C, notice was issued on 19/11/2012 under section 153C to the assessee company. In response to which the return was filed declaring the same income as was declared in the original return filed and the assessment was completed under section 153C/143(3) of the Act at total income of Rs.19,75,84,667/- by making addition of Rs.16,90,45,805/-. In first appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the additions, therefore, the present appeal is filed before us by the Revenue.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition of Rs.16,90,45,805/- on account of capital gain on sale of property.
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by rejecting the valuation report which was found and seized during the search and seizure operation without any basis.
• 3. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in simply accepting the assessee's version that the valuation report was prepared for getting limits enhanced by the banks without confronting the valuer and ascertaining the basis of valuation done by him.
• 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the valuation report without making any effort to ascertain the basis on which the valuation was done by the valuer and neither examining the valuer himself nor given the opportunity to the AO.
• 5. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by stating that the assessment should have been completed under section 144 of the IT Act, 1961 not under section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961, if the AO was satisfied about the correctness or completeness of the accounts of the assessee.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• M/s. PAR Formulations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-5(1), Chennai

• ITA Nos.3349 to 3352 & Others/Del/2015

  Delhi Bench 'D', New Delhi benchAY 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12Allowed

• DCIT, Central Circle-03, New Delhi vs. Kunjan Arora

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2009-10Dismissed

• HITCHKI CREATION PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT

  DELHI BENCH 'C', NEW DELHI benchAY 2011-12Allowed

• DCIT, CC-17, NEW DELHI Vs. M/S MANI CAPITAL LIMITED

  DELHI BENCH benchAY 2015-16Dismissed

• Bhanwarlal Pareek vs DCIT

  Delhi Bench ‘A’, New Delhi benchAY 2019-20Allowed