IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1516/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2012-13)

DCIT Vs. Som Hari Infrastructure Central Circle-8 Pvt. Ltd.

Room No. 333, 3rd Floor, E-2 Flat No. 202, 2nd Floor, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan 25/33. East Patel Nagar, Extension, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AAKCS8786Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Amit Goyal, CA and Sh. Pranav Yadav, Advocate Revenue by Ms. Jaya Choudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 17/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 30/04/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The present appeal is filed by the Department of Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)(‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 22/06/2020 pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14.

2. The grounds of Appeal are as under:-

“1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.21 crore despite the adverse evidence that the nature and source of the cash credit was unexplained and the sum had been routed through shell companies.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that addition which was not based on incriminating material found during the search could not be made in assessment u/s 153A of the I.T.Act and, consequently, deleting addition of Rs.21 crore without going into merits of the same.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) was carried out in the Sanjay Singhal Group of cases on 15/11/2017. A search warrant of authorization u/s 132 of the Act was issued in the name of the Assessee to search its premises. The Assessee had filed its original return u/s 139(1) of the Act on 29/09/2012 declaring total income of Rs. 1,70,760/- and the same was processed u/s 143(1) of the act on 18/05/2013. Since search was initiated in the case, a notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 04/04/2019 which was duly served on the Assessee. In response to the notice issued u/s 153A of the Act, return of income was filed by the Assessee on 24/04/2019 declaring the total income at Rs. 1,70,760/- without changing the returned income which was filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. An assessment order came to be passed u/s 153A r.w. Section 143(3) of the Act on 30/12/2019 by making addition of Rs. 21 crore which was received as unsecured loan by the Assessee Company during Financial Year 2011-12 relevant to Assessment Year 2012-13 through M/s Ujjawal Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 30/12/2019, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 22/06/2020, allowed the Appeal of the Assessee by relying on the Judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla (61 Taxmann.com 412) (Delhi) and other Judgments on the ground that no addition can be made in the hands of the Assessee since no incriminating material was unearthed during the course of the search and the assessment order of the Assessee stood completed on the date of the search.Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 22/06/2020, the Department of Revenue preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above.

4. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has committed error in deleting the addition despite the adverse evidence that the nature and source of the cash credit was unexplained and the same had been routed through shell Companies. Further submitted that, the Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in holding that‘addition which was not based on incriminatingmaterial found during the search could not be made in the assessment u/s 153A of the Act’ and consequently committed error in deleting the addition without going into the merit of the case. The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the search conducted and the documents seized during the search sparked the assessment proceedings against the Assessee and the A.O.

has also relied