Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur v. M/S. Sancheti Buildtech Pvt. Ltd

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 48/2018 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur. ----Appellant Versus M/s. Sancheti Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., 13, Milan Talkies Road, AshokNagar, Bhilwara (Raj.) ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna for Mr. Anil Mehta HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR VYAS Judgment 10/04/2018 1.By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed thejudgment and order of the tribunal whereby tribunal has dismissedthe appeal of the revenue and cross objections of the assesseewere allowed. 2.Counsel for the appellant has framed following substantial question of law:- “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT wascorrect in holding that no addition can bemade in absence of any incriminatingdocuments in the case of the assessee,whereas certain documents belonging to theassessee was found and seized and annexedas Annexure-AS-2 (Page 16-38) during thesearch conducted on 26.9.2012 at theresidential and business premises on Sh.Roshan Lal Sancheti. (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstancesof the case in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was correct in holding that we need not deal withthe merits of the additions made by the AOwhich is contrary to in view of the judgmentof the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case ofCIT vs. Chetan Das Lachman Das (2012)2011 Taxmann 61 (Del.), CIT vs. Anil KumarBhatia (2013) 352 ITR 493 (Del.), FilataxIndia Ltd. vs. CIT (2014) 40 Taxmann.com465/229 taxmann 555 (Del.) and thejudgment of Hon’ble Kerala High Court, inthe case of Sunny Jacob Jewellers andWedding Centre vs. Deputy Commissioner ofIncome Tax (2014) 362 ITR 664 (Ker).” 3.The facts of the case are that a search and seizure action u/s132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried out on 26.9.2012 atthe residential premises of the assessee group and his familymembers. Various assets had been found at the time of searchand some of them were also seized at various places of the groupat the time of action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act. Certainincriminating documents/loose papers/Books of accounts etc. werealso found, inventorized and some of them also seized at the timeof search/survey u/s 132/133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Anotice u/s 153 C was issued on 22.5.2014 which was duly servedupon the assessee by Registered post. In response to the noticeu/s 153C, the assessee has submitted return of income on2.6.2014 declaring income of Rs.1,35,610/-. A notice u/s 143(2)was issued on 10.10.2014 and the same was duly served upon theassessee. A detailed questionnaire and notice u/s 142(1) wereissued on 14.10.2014. 3.1The Assessing Officer vide assessment order dt. 25.3.2015,held that investment of Rs.1,65,00,000/- for the year underconsideration in the shares by share application money asunexplained money and made addition in the total income. The Assessing Officer also made a disallowance of Rs.3,41,000/- u/s43A(3) of the IT Act of payments in cash exceeding Rs.20,000/-and Rs.1,524/- towards income tax. 4.In our considered opinion, the appeal raises the issuerequiring appreciation of facts, therefore, no substantial questionof law arises. 5.The appeal stands dismissed. (VIJAY KUMAR VYAS),J (K.S.JHAVERI),J Brijesh 124.