Facts of the
Case
The Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A
challenging the deletion of an addition of ₹21,00,00,000 made in the hands of
Som Hari Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. for Assessment Year 2012-13. The addition was
made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that a Kolkata-based firm which had
advanced the said amount lacked creditworthiness. The assessment arose out of
search proceedings.
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, by
order dated 22.06.2020, deleted the addition holding that no incriminating
material relating to the alleged unsecured loan was found during the course of
search and that the conclusion regarding lack of creditworthiness was drawn
only during assessment proceedings. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the
Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III vs. Kabul Chawla.
The ITAT, Delhi Bench “G”, upheld the order of the CIT(A) vide order dated
30.04.2025. Aggrieved, the Revenue approached the High Court.
Issues
Involved
Whether an addition under Section 153A can be
sustained in respect of a completed assessment year in the absence of any
incriminating material found during search, and whether issues relating to
creditworthiness examined only during assessment proceedings can justify such
addition.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The Revenue contended that the Assessing Officer
was justified in making the addition as the lender lacked creditworthiness and
argued that the CIT(A) and the ITAT erred in deleting the addition.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The assessee relied on settled law that in
search-based assessments under Section 153A, no addition can be made for
completed assessment years unless supported by incriminating material unearthed
during search. It was submitted that no such material existed and that the
issue of creditworthiness was examined only during assessment proceedings.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Delhi High Court observed that both the CIT(A)
and the ITAT had recorded concurrent findings of fact that no incriminating material
was found during the search for Assessment Year 2012-13. The Court noted that
the reliance placed on the judgment in Kabul Chawla was correct and further
observed that the said judgment has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt.
Ltd.
The Court held that in the absence of incriminating
material, the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to make the impugned
addition in proceedings under Section 153A. It further held that the issue
raised by the Revenue was purely factual and did not give rise to any
substantial question of law.
Important
Clarification
The High Court reiterated that for completed
assessment years, additions under Section 153A are impermissible unless based
on incriminating material found during the search. Issues such as
creditworthiness examined only during assessment proceedings cannot substitute
the statutory requirement of incriminating material.
Final
Outcome
The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The
deletion of the addition of ₹21,00,00,000 was upheld, and the orders of the
CIT(A) and the ITAT were affirmed.
Link to download order https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769504182_THEPR.COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCENTRAL1VsSOMHARIINFRASTRUCTUREPVT.LTD..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment