The Delhi High Court dismissed appeals filed by the Pr. CIT challenging ITAT orders that upheld relief granted to the assessee for search and seizure proceedings under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act in the absence of incriminating materials.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~53 & 55
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
versus
M/S KP POUCHES PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent + ITA 530/2018
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) – 2GHT_C ..... Appellant
versus
M/S KP POUCHES PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent
Present: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue. None for the respondent.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA
The Revenue questions orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which had upheld the relief granted to the assessee for A.Y. 2005-06 and A.Y. 2006-07. The amounts were added by the Assessing Officer (AO) on the basis of inferences drawn in the course of search and seizure proceedings, pursuant to notice under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as „the Act‟). ITA 528/2018 & ITA 530/2018 Page 1 of 2
The CIT(A), whom the assessee approached, partially granted relief. Both parties approached the ITAT which accepted the assessee‟s cross-objection and upheld the CIT(A)‟s order, with respect to cancellation of the amounts brought to tax. The ITAT ruled – correctly in the opinion of the Court – that in the absence of incriminating materials seized in the search proceedings under Section 132 of the Act, the amounts could not have been brought to tax as they were in the present case; the ITAT applied the ruling in CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573.
No substantial question of law arises. The appeals are dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
A. K. CHAWLA, J
MAY 07, 2018 kks
Page 2 of 2
ITA 528/2018 & ITA 530/2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can entertain appeals against orders of the ITAT in absentia when the respondent is unrepresented.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
CIT v. Kabul ChawlaApplied¶15
CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – 2
M/s KP Pouches Pvt. Ltd.
S. Ravindra Bhat
A. K. Chawla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
