Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation of Bail For Man Accused of Assault Causing Miscarriage  ||  J&K&L High Court Invalidates Residence-Based Reservation, Citing Violation of Article 16  ||  Kerala HC Denies Parole to Life Convict in TP Chandrasekharan Murder Case For Cousin's Funeral  ||  High Court Grants Bail to J&K Bank Manager in Multi-Crore Loan Fraud Case, Emphasizing Bail As Rule  ||  J&K HC: Civil Remedy Alone Cannot Be Used To Quash Criminal Proceedings in Enso Tower Case  ||  Delhi HC: Non-Proof of Hearing Notice Dispatch Doesn’t by Itself Show no Personal Hearing Was Given  ||  Delhi High Court: No Construction or Residence Allowed on Yamuna Floodplains, Even For Graveyards  ||  J&K High Court: Right to Speedy Trial Includes Appeals; Closes 46-Year-Old Criminal Case Due to Delay  ||  J&K High Court: Courts Must Not Halt Corruption Probes, Refuses to Quash FIR  ||  J&K&L HC: Matrimonial Remedies May Overlap, But Cruelty Claims Cannot be Selectively Invoked    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved