The search action carried out at the premises of one Lodha\u00a0 group.\u00a0 Books of accounts, documents, loose sheets\u00a0 and the cash were seized.\u00a0 Statement on oath u\/s 132(4) of the Act of Shri Abbhinandan Lodha\u00a0 of Lodha\u00a0 group was recorded wherein voluntary disclosure of income Rs. 199.80 Crores was made in the hands of various entities of Lodha Group including the assessee Company. Subsequently, the statements of other employees of Lodha Group were also recorded.\u00a0 The assessee is in the business of development and construction of real estate, a limited Company, being an artificial judicial person having its separate identity. The Hon\u2019ble ITAT found that there is no mention to any specific material seized from the premises of Lodha Group corresponding to the assessment year under reference, belong to the assessee Company.\u00a0 The statements recorded of various persons are neither the employees nor the Director of the assessee Company. The term Lodha\u00a0 Group cannot be used against the assessee Company without identifying the specific material belonging to\u00a0\u00a0 Following the decision of in the case of CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society\u00a0 (2017) 297 CTR 441 \/ 156 DTR 161 (SC) the assessment completed u\/s 153C is set aside. Tribunal also held that the statement of the persons of Lodha Group was based on the electronically retrieved data and the provisions of section 65A of the Evidence Act and \u00a0Information Technology Act, 2000 are not complied with, addition were \u00a0deleted.\u00a0 (AY. 2011-12) \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search Development and construction of real estate-No incriminating material-The statement of the persons of Lodha group based on the electronically retrieved data-Addition based on such retrieved data, not sustainable, Addition was deleted. [S. 132(4), Evidence Act, 3, 22A, 45A, 62, 115, S. 65B, Information Technology Act, 2000, S. 2, 59, 65A, 65B, 79A,] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-36974","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-9Cm","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36974","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=36974"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36974\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":36975,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36974\/revisions\/36975"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36974"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36974"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36974"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}