AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
These three appeals by the assessee are preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Gurgaon-3 dated 26.09.2025 arising out of the assessment orders dated 29.03.2016 passed by the DCIT, CC-I, Gurgaon under section 153A (1)(b) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) for A.Ys. 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15
Since the above captioned appeals were heard together and the facts in issues are identical, all the three appeals are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.
The grounds of appeal of the assessee in ITA No.7741/Del/2025 are as under :
1.“That on the facts and in the circumstances of case, the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred as "CIT(A)"] by arbitrarily confirming addition of Rs. 88,50,000/-, is bad both in the eyes of law and on facts.
2.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating and dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution by passing appellate order on 26/09/2025.
3.That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the initiation of the assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act is bad in law as relied upon seized document for recording satisfaction note does not belong, pertains or any information contained therein relates to the appellant and has no bearing on the determination of the total income of the appellant for the assessment year under consideration, therefore the mandatory conditions prescribed under section 153C has not been met, which would vitiate entire assessment proceedings."
4.That on the facts and circumstances of the case, initiation of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act for AY 2012-13 by recording consolidated satisfaction note for all assessment years i.e. 2008 - 09 to 2014 - 15 is bad in law and liable to be quashed being proceedings initiated u/s 153C is in violation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) v. Sunil Kumar Sharma [2024] 165 taxmann.com 846 (SC) that satisfaction note has to be recorded separately for each assessment year.
5.That on the facts and circumstances of case, the Ld. assessing officer erred in law in passing assessment order under section 153A(1)(b) of the Income tax Act, 1961 instead of section 153C of the Act which is liable to be quashed as the basis of initiation of assessment proceedings in the case of appellant was search and seizure action carried out in the case of third parties.
6.That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order passed u/s 153A(1)(b) of the Act is invalid and bad in law as learned Joint Commissioner of Income tax, Central Range, Gurgaon has given his approval u/s 153D of the Act in arbitrary and mechanical manner without judicious application of mind.
7.That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts & in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 88,50,000/- u/s 69C of the Act being unexplained expenditure made by AO on the basis of documents seized during the course of search action from the premises of third parties whereas such documents do not belong to, pertain to, or any information contained therein relates to the appellant being the name of appellant does not appear on the said seized documents and the appellant has not made the alleged cash transaction and RTGS transaction mentioned on the seized documents.
8.That the grounds of appeal are independent and without prejudice to each other.
9.The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is having income from business and profession and filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 25.09.2012 declaring a business loss of Rs. 5,29,077/-. The case of the assessee company was reopened after issue of notice u/s 153A read with section 153C of the Act dated 25.02.2016. The assessee company has received the assessment order dated 29/03/2016 for assessment year 2012-13 wherein Rs 88,50,000/- was added u/s 69C of the Act. Aggrieved assessee was in appeal before CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved, assessee is now in appeal before us.
At the outset, learned Counsel of the assessee stated that the CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order and prayed for setting aside the order to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Per contra, learned DR did not raise any serious objection and relied upon the order of authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the CIT(A) had given opportunities to the assessee and in absence of any response from the assessee, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. We are of the considered view that the CIT(A) should have given reasonable opportunities to the assessee to represent the case. We therefore, are of the view that the issues involved in the case be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to accord three effective opportunities to the assessee and assessee is likewise directed to avail the opportunities and submit documents/evidence as required by the CIT(A). The appeal of the assessee is decided in aforesaid terms.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
ITA Nos.7742 & 7743/Del/2025 for A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 :
The facts in the instant cases are identical to the facts of the case decided above. The decision therefore in ITA No. 7741/Del/2026 will apply mutatis mutandis to the facts of the instant cases.
In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 7741, 7742 & 7743/Del/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 18.05.2026.