Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-3 Delhi v. Alchemist Life Sciences Ltd Through

$~S-42 to 45 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 20/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 DELHI ..... Appellant ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. versus ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCES LTD Through ..... Respondent + ITA 21/2022PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 DELHI ..... Appellant PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 DELHI ..... Appellant ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. versus ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCE LTD Through ..... Respondent + ITA 22/2022PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. versus ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCES LTD Through ..... Respondent + ITA 23/2022PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3 DELHI ..... Appellant ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate. versus ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCES LTD Through ..... Respondent % Date of Decision: 03[rd] February, 2022 CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (ORAL) 1.The appeals have been heard by way of video conferencing. 2.Present appeals have been filed challenging the order dated 12[th] July, 2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [‘ITAT’] in ITA Nos.792, 793, 794 and 795/Del/2018, whereby the appeals of the appellant/revenue were dismissed. 3.Learned counsel for the appellant states that ITAT has erred in holding that additions cannot be made under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act [‘Act’], if it is not based on the seized materials/documents found during the course of search and seizure operations under Section 132 of the Act, as the appeals in the case of APAR Industries Limited, ITA 1669/2013decided by the Bombay High Court and 115 other cases are currently pending before the Supreme Court. 4.Having perused the paperbook, this Court is of the opinion that the questions of law raised in the present appeals have been settled by the predecessor Division Bench in CIT v. Kabul Chawla, [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) and assessment of the respondent had attained finality prior to the date of search and no incriminating materials/documents had been found and/or seized at the time of search. 5.Consequently, no addition can be made under Section 153A of the Act, as the cases of the respondent are of non-abated assessments. 6.Though some of the judgments of this Court have been challenged and are pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay of the said judgments till date. 7.Consequently, in view of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Kunhayammed and Others Vs. State of Kerala And Another, (2000) 6 SCC 359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeals are dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench. MANMOHAN, J FEBRUARY 3, 2022 TS NAVIN CHAWLA, J