ITA No.370 of 2017 (O&M) --1-- IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.370 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 16.11.2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Gurgaon Petitioner Versus Sh. Ranjit Singh Gill ... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill Present:- Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Varinder Kaur Warraich, Advocate, for appellant. ***** Rajesh Bindal, J. revenue has filed present petition raising following substantial questions of law arising out of order dated December 30, 2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Division Bench, Chandigarh in ITA No.100/Chd/2015-Ranjit Singh Gill Vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle- II, Chandigarh for assessment year 2009-10:- i) Whether on facts and circumstances of case ITAT was right in concluding that there was difference in scope of proceedings under Section 153- of Income Tax Act, 1961 for abated assessment and for completed assessment? ii) Whether on facts and circumstances of case ITAT was right in holding that no addition can be made u/s 153A in respect of completed assessment if no incriminating material is found during search? 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2017 10:23:50 ::: ITA No.370 of 2017 (O&M) --2-- iii) Whether there is any restriction on powers of Assessing Officer under section 153A of Income Tax Act, 1961 to confine only to incriminating material found during search , even though such words or conditions are not mentioned in section per se? iv) Whether on facts and circumstances of case ITAT was correct in interpreting section 153A which started with non-obstinate clause stating therein that operation of section 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 & 153 was deposed. Meaning thereby that in search cases Assessing Officer is duty bound to take up assessment u/s 153A and that above mentioned sections cannot be invoked. Therefore, even if incriminating material is not found during search, but if any escaped income or under-assessed income undisclosed income has to be assessed for such completed assessment, then it has to be done in proceeding u/s 153A in search cases? v) Whether on facts and circumstance of case ITAT was right to bring in special procedure of block assessment as laid in Chapter XIV B into new procedure of search assessment u/s 153A introduced by Finance Act, 2003, w.e.f. 1.06.2003, when Chapter XIV B was scrapped to reduce litigation and disputes regarding treatment of particular income as undisclosed and whether it is relatable to material found during search (Finance bill 2003 under head Assessment in search cases- abolition of special procedure in Chapter XIV-B and introduction of new provisions )? vi) Whether on facts and circumstances of case ITAT was right in ignoring basic difference in search assessment u/s 153A and chapter XIVB being that in section 153A total income has to be 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2017 10:23:51 ::: ITA No.370 of 2017 (O&M) --3-- assessed or reassessed in six separate A.Ys., as opposed to assessing undisclosed income in scraped Chapter XIV B for block period in single assessment? vii) Whether on facts and circumstances of case ITAT was right in following Delhi High Court decision in case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (61 taxman.com 412) when Hon ble HC itself admits in para 37(iv) Although section 153A does not say that additions should strictly made on basis of evidence found in course of search .. thereby interpreting statute in manner which were never worded or intended by legislature? viii) Whether or facts and circumstances of case ITAT has erred in ignoring Principle of Strict interpretation of statues when words used in statute i.e. sec 153A(1)(b) of IT Act, 1961 are Assess or Reassess Total Income ix) Whether on facts and circumstances of case ITAT right in not following Hon ble SC judgment on interpretation of statue in case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam & other vs. CIT (108 ITR 345), Keshavji Ravji And Co vd. CIT (183 ITR 1), Padamsundara Rao (Decd.) & others vs. State of Tamil Nadu 255 ITR 147, Prakash Nath Khanna & Other vs. CIT 266 ITR 1, Institute of Chartered Accountants of India vs. Price Water House 93 Taxman 588? x) Whether on facts and circumstances on case ITAT is not following Hon ble HC judgment on issue of additions in search case u/s 153A in case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar Bhatia 352 ITR 493 (Delhi HC), Madugula Venu vs. DIT 29 Taxman.com 200 (Delhi HC), CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora 367 ITR 517 (Allahabad HC), Canara Housing Development 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2017 10:23:51 ::: ITA No.370 of 2017 (O&M) --4-- Company vs. DCIT 49 taxman.com98 (Karnataka HC), Filatex India Ltd. vs. CIT 229 Taxman 555 (Delhi HC), Sunny Jacob Jewellers and wedding centre, 362 ITR 664 (Kerala HC) and CIT vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation 64 taxman.com34(SC)? xi) Whether Hon ble ITAT was justified in following decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court dated 28.05.2015 in case of CIT Vs Kabul Chawla, when said decision was distinguished in Revenue favoring judgment of Hon ble Delhi Court dated 27.10.2016 in case of Smt. Dayawanti through Smt. Sunita Gupta (L/H) Vs CIT. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that tax effect in present appeal being ` 11,64,930/-, which is less than monetary limit prescribed by Central Board of Direct Taxes for filing appeals in High Courts vide circular No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015, he may be permitted to withdraw present appeal. Ordered accordingly. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) 16.11.2017 Judge pankaj Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 23-11-2017 10:23:51 ::: Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Gurgaon v. Ranjit Singh Gill