Bombay HC: Insolvency Cannot be Used to Evade a Family Court’s Maintenance Order  ||  Kerala HC: Forklifts and Factory Cranes Are Motor Vehicles and Must be Registered under MV Act  ||  Guj HC: Edible Crude Palm Kernel Oil Qualifies for Duty Exemption; End-Use Condition not Applicable  ||  NCLAT Delhi: Advance under Land-Development MoU is not Financial Debt and Cannot Trigger CIRP  ||  NCLAT: NCLT Cannot Change Capital Structure of a Legally Compliant Successful Auction Purchaser  ||  Supreme Court: Endless Investigation and Long Delay in Filing Chargesheet Can Justify Quashing Case  ||  SC: Landowners Accepting Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Claim Statutory Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act  ||  Supreme Court: Indian Courts Cannot Appoint Arbitrators for Arbitrations Seated Outside India  ||  Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report    

DCIT vs. VKS Properties Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (18 Aug 2023)

When substantive addition has already been completed, no protective addition can be confirmed

MANU/ID/1195/2023

Direct Taxation

Assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 85,626. In the assessment order, the AO has made an addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) on account unexplained credit entries of Rs. 12,63,58,536 in the bank account of the appellant received from various parties on protective basis.

Against the assessment order, assessee appealed before the Learned CIT(A) who vide his impugned order has partly allowed the appeal by observing that the commission income earned on providing accommodation entries through the assessee company have already been assessed by the Assessing Officer in the hands of Anand Jain and Naresh Jain which has been confirmed by him in their respective appeals, hence, no further addition can be made in the hands of the assessee company and deleted the protective addition of Rs. 12,63,58,536.Against the order, Revenue is in appeal.

The commission income earned on providing accommodation entries through the assessee company have already been assessed by the AO in the hands of Anand Jain and Naresh Jain which has been confirmed by the Learned CIT(A) in their respective appeals. Therefore, Learned CIT(A) has rightly held that, no further addition can be made in the hands of the assessee company and therefore, directed to delete the protective addition of Rs. 12,63,58,536 made by the AO.

The issue in the instant appeal is squarely covered by the Delhi Tribunal's order in the case of Sh. Anand Kumar Jain vs. ACIT &Ors. wherein, on similar aspect and identical facts and circumstances, the Tribunal held that since the substantive addition has already been completed in the case of Sh. Naresh Kumar Jain, hence, no protective addition can be confirmed at this juncture in the case of the assesseei.e. Anand Kumar Jain and accordingly dismissed the appeal of the Revenue.

In view of facts and circumstances of the present case, Learned CIT(A) has rightly decided the issue in favour of the Assessee and deleted the addition in dispute, after elaborately discussing the issue in detail, which did not require any interference. Revenue Appeals are dismissed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   DELETION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved