Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Ssa International Ltd vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 19 April, 2021

Author: Rajiv Shakdher

Bench: Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh

                          $~35
                          *       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +       W.P.(C) 4835/2021
                                  SSA INTERNATIONAL LTD.                       ..... Petitioner
                                               Through: Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, Adv.

                                                      versus

                                  ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-7
                                                                            ..... Respondent
                                                 Through: Mr. Sunil Agarwal, Sr. Standing
                                                          Counsel.
                                  CORAM:
                                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
                                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
                                           ORDER

% 19.04.2021 [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19] CM APPL. 14887/2021

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 4835/2021

2. This writ petition is, essentially, directed against the order dated 17.02.2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [hereafter referred to as the "Tribunal"] in Miscellaneous Application No.731/Del/2018 in ITA No.5051/Del/2013.

2.1. To be noted, the assessee also preferred an appeal in this Court against order dated 30.05.2018 passed in the aforesaid ITA by the Tribunal. That appeal is numbered as ITA No.1479/2018 and is also listed today before this Court.

2.2. The principal issue, which arises for consideration both in the assessee‟s appeal [i.e., ITA No. 1479/2018] and the instant writ petition, is as to whether or not it is entitled to the benefit of sub-section (2) of Section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short „the Act‟).

3. Mr. Sumit Lalchandani, who appears for the assessee, says that once undisclosed income was admitted by the assessee and the manner in which such income was derived was specified by the assessee, the assessee was entitled to substantiate the manner in which such income was derived even after the search.

3.1 In support of his submission, Mr. Lalchandani relies upon the decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 13.09.2018, passed in ITA No.973/2018, titled The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-Central-3 vs. Bhavi Chand Jindal. (See page 171, Annexure P-11.)

4. Mr. Sunil Agarwal, who appears on advance notice for the revenue, says that while one cannot quibble with the proposition that substantiation under clause (ii) of sub-section (2) of Section 271AAA of the Act can be made even after the search, in this case, the assessee did not substantiate the manner in which undisclosed income was derived. 4.1. In rejoinder, Mr. Lalchandani relied upon the communication dated 29.03.2012, marked as Annexure P-5, to controvert this submission made by Mr. Agarwal that the assessee had not substantiated the manner in which it had derived undisclosed income.

4.2. According to Mr. Lalchandani, the Tribunal has not taken into account the communication dated 29.03.2012, addressed by the assessee to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-7, New Delhi

5. The matter requires further consideration.

6. Issue notice.

6.1. Mr. Agarwal accepts service on behalf of the revenue. 6.2. A counter affidavit will be filed within four weeks from today. Rejoinder thereto, if any, will be filed before the next date of hearing.

7. List the matter on 03.08.2021.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TALWANT SINGH, J APRIL 19, 2021/pmc Click here to check corrigendum, if any W.P.(C) 4835/2021 3/3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIPIN KUMAR RAI Signing Date:22.04.2021 18:53:04