This case pertains to the assessment year 2014-15, where the appellant, Marudhara Marketing Pvt. Ltd., located in New Delhi, filed an appeal against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT), Central Circle 30, New Delhi. The case was filed on February 6, 2019, and the order was pronounced on October 21, 2019. The appeal was directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi dated December 28, 2018.
The case was presented before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench ‘D’, New Delhi. The panel consisted of Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member, and Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member. The appeal was listed as ITA No. 890/Del/2019 for the assessment year 2014-15.
At the time of the hearing on September 4, 2019, the appellant was represented by Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate, while the Revenue was represented by Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR.
The appellant, Marudhara Marketing Pvt. Ltd., filed the appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), challenging the addition made by the assessing officer and confirmed by the CIT(A). The grounds of appeal included allegations of violation of natural justice, reliance on unverified statements, and the wrongful addition of Rs. 1,79,99,800/- on account of share capital and share premium.
The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the assessment was framed on the basis of a satisfaction note that did not reveal any incriminating evidence leading to undisclosed income. The appellant also contended that the assessment was based on an unverified statement of Shri Mul Chand Malu and that no opportunity for cross-examination was provided.
The Revenue, represented by the CIT DR, argued that the onus was on the appellant to produce evidence of the share capital and share premium and that the appellant failed to produce the directors of the companies from which the share capital was received.
Upon careful consideration of the submissions and the record, the Tribunal found that the assessment was not based on any incriminating material found during the search and seizure operation. The Tribunal noted that the original return was processed under section 143(1) and that no notice under section 143(2) was issued.
The Tribunal concluded that the assessment framed under section 153C was not sustainable as it was not based on any incriminating material found during the search. The Tribunal quashed the assessment order and allowed the appeal filed by the appellant.
The final judgment stated that the appeal of the assessee, Marudhara Marketing Pvt. Ltd., was allowed. This decision was announced at the conclusion of the virtual hearing on October 21, 2019, by Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member, and Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member.
The official copy of the order was forwarded to:
By the Order of Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform