Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Central, Jaipur v. Order

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN ATJODHPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 125/2017 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Central, Jaipur. ----Appellant Versus Smt. Daksha Jain, W/o Shri Virendra Modi, Adarsh Nagar, Sirohi.----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr.KK Bissa, Sr.Standing Counsel for Income Tax with Mr.GS Chouhan.For Respondent(s): Mr.Hemant Bhati for Mr.Sanjay Nahar. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI 04/07/2019 Order 1.Various questions of law with respect to dis-allowanceand additions made in the course of re-assessment proceedingsare urged by the Revenue in its appeal under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) 2.The search under Section 132 of the Act was conductedin the assessee’s premises on 10.2.2010. This resulted in noticesunder Section 153A which culminated in search assessment ordersfor block period between assessment years 2004-05 to 2010-11.The additions made were on identical grounds i.e. business loss,claim for dis-allowance of interest of substantial amount, additionsmade on account of unexplained cash entries in the bankaccounts, etc. 3.The ITAT noticed inter alia that all the additions werenot based upon any fresh materials seized during the course ofsearch. That was the first ground for setting aside the order ; the ITAT also considered and decided in favour of the assessee on themerits of the additions. 4.The approach of the ITAT of setting aside the searchassessment on the ground that no fresh materials was seized ordiscerned in the course of search is correct and conform to theview taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Central)-III vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR573. That judgment has been followed by various High Courtsincluding this Court. 5.Consequently, no question of law arises. The presentappeal is accordingly dismissed. (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J (S. RAVINDRA BHAT),CJ 38-SPhophaliya/-