SC: Public Premises Act Prevails over State Rent Laws For Evicting Unauthorised Occupants  ||  SC: Doctors Were Unwavering Heroes in COVID-19, and Their Sacrifice Remains Indelible  ||  SC Sets Up Secondary Medical Board to Assess Passive Euthanasia Plea of Man in Vegetative State  ||  NCLAT: Amounts Listed As ‘Other Advances’ in Company’s Balance Sheet aren’t Financial Debt under IBC  ||  NCLT Ahmedabad: Objections to Coc Cannot Bar RP From Challenging Preferential Transactions  ||  J&K&L HC: Courts Should Exercise Caution When Granting Interim Relief in Public Infrastructure Cases  ||  Bombay HC: SARFAESI Sale Invalid if Sale Certificate is Not Issued Prior to IBC Moratorium  ||  Supreme Court: Police May Freeze Bank Accounts under S.102 CrPC in Prevention of Corruption Cases  ||  SC: Arbitrator’s Mandate Ends on Time Expiry; Substituted Arbitrator Must Continue After Extension  ||  SC: Woman May Move Her Department’s ICC For Harassment by Employee of Another Workplace    

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