This order dismisses the Revenue's appeal questioning the ITAT's deletion of amounts added under Section 153A for the financial year 2001-02. The court held that no substantial question of law arose supported by the judgment in CIT v. Kabul Chawla.
The Revenue's appeal and pending application were dismissed without any additional relief.
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.
$~54
..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue.
versus
RENU NANDA ..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA
O R D E R
The Revenue’s appeal is directed against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) questioning the deletion of certain amounts brought to tax in the hands of the assessee for A.Y. 2001-02. The scrutiny assessment under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as ‘the Act’) concluded in the hands of the assessee whereby the Assessing Officer (AO) added certain amounts, received by her from her husband. The lower appellate authorities granted relief to the appellant holding that in the course of the search and seizure no fresh material had been recovered. This view is supported by the judgment of this Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla , (2016) 380 ITR 573. Furthermore, the Court notices that the AO added this amount in the hands of the assessee on the ground that
the source of the assessee’s husband’s income or receipts was not made known. On this aspect, both the lower appellate authorities have ruled correctly that the assessee is not under an obligation to establish the source of the source and merely has to indicate that the receipt is genuine from an identified party. This Court has rejected the Revenue’s appeal for later years in ITA Nos.527 and 529/2018 [Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2) vs. Renu Nanda].
In view of the above, the Court is of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed along with pending application.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
A. K. CHAWLA, J
MAY 14, 2018 nn
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Revenue's appeal questioning the deletion of tax amounts added under Section 153A raises a substantial question of law in light of the ITAT order and the judgment in CIT v. Kabul Chawla.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
CIT v. Kabul ChawlaReferred¶13
CIT v. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2) vs. Renu NandaReferred¶13
ITA Nos.527 and 529/2018 [Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-2) vs. Renu Nanda]
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 2
Renu Nanda
S. Ravindra Bhat
A. K. Chawla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
