Ita/163/2016 Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 Ludhiana v. Harinder

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.102 ITA No.163 of 2016 (O&M)Date of decision: 10.05.2018 The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ludhiana....Appellant VerTSU Harinder ....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL Present:Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocatefor the appellant. * * * RAJESH BINDAL, J. Revenue is in appeal against the order passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Division Bench, Chandigarh (for short — ‘theTribunal’) passed in ITA No.505/CHD/2014 dated 18.12.2015 for theassessment year 2006-07, raising the following substantial questions oflaw:- 1)Whether on the facts and in circumstances of thecase and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was right indeleting addition of Rs.93,63,000/- made by theAssessing Officer u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act.11)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances ofthe case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT has erred ingranting relief to the assessee holding that sameaddition has been made in the case of M/s BaseraRealtors Pvt. Ltd. without appreciating that theAssessing Officer has formed opinion based onevidences gathered during assessment proceedingsin the form of statement of sellers and submissionof the directors of M/s Basera Realtors Pvt. Ltd. before the DCIT, Central Circle and withoutappreciating that the assessment in the case of M/sBasera Realtors Pvt. Ltd. has not attained finality.” Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that search wasconducted on the premises of Basera Realtors Pvt. Ltd. During the course ofassessment proceedings, Managing Director of Basera Realtors Pvt. Ltd,made a statement that 50% of unexplained investment belong to therespondent-assessee. The information was passed on to the AssessingOfficer. Assessment proceedings under Sections 147/148 of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (for short — 'the Act’) were completed. The present proceedingsarise out of those assessment orders. At the time of framing of assessmentafter search in the case of Basera Realtors Pvt. Ltd. 50% of the unexplainedinvestment which belonged to the respondent-assessee was not taken intoaccount. Order passed by the Assessing Officer was revised by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana, in exercise of powersunder Section 263 of the Act. It was opined that the entire undisclosedinvestment is to be assessed at the hands of Basera Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Inappeal filed by Basera Realtors Pvt. Ltd. before the Tribunal order passedby the revisional authority was upheld. It has been so recorded in para 18 ofthe order passed by the Tribunal. There is no further appeal filed by theBasrea Realtors Pvt. Ltd. challenging the aforesaid order passed by therevisional authority directing assessment of the entire unexplainedinvestment in 1ts hands. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer only forthe purpose of calculation of the quantum. As per the information available with the Department, Basera ITA No.163 of 2016 (O&M) Realtors Pvt. Ltd. has not challenged the order passed by theTribunal upholding the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Central), Ludhiana, under Section 263 of the Act. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, learned counsel for therevenue submitted that once the entire undisclosed investment has beenassessed in the hands of Basera Realtors Pvt. Ltd., the assessment of theSame amount in the hands of the assessee will not be justified. Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts, no substantial questionsof law arise in the present appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed, (Rajesh Bindal)Judge May 10, 2018Jyoti I (Deepak Sibal)Judge Whether speaking/reasonedWhether reportable YesYes/No