Delhi High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income ... vs Alchemist Life Sciences Ltd on 3 February, 2022
$~S-42 to 45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ITA 20/2022
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3
DELHI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.
versus
ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCES LTD ..... Respondent
Through
+ ITA 21/2022
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3
DELHI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.
versus
ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCE LTD ..... Respondent
Through
+ ITA 22/2022
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3
DELHI ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.
versus
ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCES LTD ..... Respondent
Through
+ ITA 23/2022
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-3
DELHI ..... Appellant
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
Signing Date:04.02.2022 ITA 20/2022 and connected matters Page 1 of 3
22:00:50
Through: Mr.Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.
versus
ALCHEMIST LIFE SCIENCES LTD ..... Respondent
Through
% Date of Decision: 03rd February, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J (ORAL)
1. The appeals have been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present appeals have been filed challenging the order dated 12th July,
2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ['ITAT'] in ITA
Nos.792, 793, 794 and 795/Del/2018, whereby the appeals of the
appellant/revenue were dismissed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant states that ITAT has erred in
holding that additions cannot be made under Section 153A of the Income
Tax Act ['Act'], if it is not based on the seized materials/documents found
during the course of search and seizure operations under Section 132 of the
Act, as the appeals in the case of APAR Industries Limited, ITA 1669/2013
decided by the Bombay High Court and 115 other cases are currently
pending before the Supreme Court.
4. Having perused the paperbook, this Court is of the opinion that the
questions of law raised in the present appeals have been settled by the
predecessor Division Bench in CIT v. Kabul Chawla, [2016] 380 ITR 573
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
22:00:50
(Delhi) and assessment of the respondent had attained finality prior to the
date of search and no incriminating materials/documents had been found
and/or seized at the time of search.
5. Consequently, no addition can be made under Section 153A of the
Act, as the cases of the respondent are of non-abated assessments.
6. Though some of the judgments of this Court have been challenged
and are pending adjudication before the Supreme Court, yet there is no stay
of the said judgments till date.
7. Consequently, in view of the judgments of the Supreme Court in
Kunhayammed and Others Vs. State of Kerala And Another, (2000) 6 SCC
359 and Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. Vs. Church of South India Trust
Association CSI Cinod Secretariat, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present
appeals are dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned
predecessor Division Bench.
MANMOHAN, J
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
FEBRUARY 3, 2022
TS
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
22:00:50
