TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at there was no indication of any financial transaction leading to understatement of income except the mention of purchase of property on 05/02/2004 which is relevant to the Assessment Year 2004-05 and are not relevant to the assessment years under consideration. Therefore, the said documents cannot be held to be the incriminating material for the purpose of initiating the proceedings under section 153C of the Act. Earlier the assessments in this case are completed, since, the time limit for issue of notice u/s 143(2) got expired before the date of search, the AO did not make any addition in the assessment orders on the basis of the seized material. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 113 to 115/VIZ/2017 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2018 - SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri P. Prabhakara Murthy Adv. For The Department : Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal, CIT DR ORDER PER D. S. SUNDER SINGH, JUDICIALMEMBER These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Visakhapatnam, all dated 21/11/2016 for the Assessment Yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The time limit of issuance of notice under section 143(2) was expired by the time search conducted in this case, hence, assessment must be treated as completed assessments. In the completed assessments, no notice under section 153C can be issued, unless there is an incriminating material evidencing the escapement of income or under statement of income and also argued that no addition can be made u/s 153C without the incriminating material. Ld. AR submitted before the ld. CIT(A) that since the time limit for issuance of notice u/sec. 143(2) got expired, by the time, search was conducted. The assessment needs to be treated as completed assessment and the notice issued under section 153C without the incriminating material is invalid and required to be quashed and the addition made in the orders to be deleted. The ld. CIT(A) not being convinced with the argument of the assessee placing heavy reliance on the two loose sheets found during the course of search which were annexed to the appellate order, upheld the validity of issuance of notice. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and again challenged the validity of notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent taxes were paid. I further submit that were please to issue instruction in similar case in Amalapuram municipalities that 10% open place charges may not be levied in the existing builtup area where the applicant coming forward for redevelopment/reconstruction only and where all the amenities are provided by the municipalities(vide government memo no. 15929/MI/2005/1. Dated 24-6-2006 and government memo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . dated 4-7-2006 copies enclosed). In the above circumstances you to exempt the levy or 10% open place charges and permission given to reconstruction/redevelopment the building as per the revised plansubmitted to your on date _____2006. (b) Affidavit We independently and jointly purchased sites at Jawahar Streer, Kakinada relating to Door No. 27-4-7. The adjacent sites purchased by Sri Rajesh Kumar, W/o. Shantilal, Smt. Lalitha, W/o. Bhawarlal and Smt. VasanthiBai, W/o. babulaiji, Sri Vikram Kumar Jam, Sb. Shantilal and sujitkumar Sb. Babulal. For the sake of convenience, we got approved a consolidated plan by the Municipal Corporation, Kakinada under BA No. 129/06/G2. Dated 29-12-2006. Sri Vikramkumarjain, Sujit Kumar, Smt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o furnish the details of the date of requisition made u/s 132A. In the absence of date of requisition made under section 132A, the date of issuance of notice u/s. 153C dated 03/10/2010 held to be the date of requisition made under section 132A. As per section 153C the date of initiation of search in such other person is to be reckoned from the date of requisition made u/s 132A. For ready reference we extract the relevant part the proviso to section 153C which reads as under: Provided that in case of such other person, the reference to the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A in the second proviso to section 153A shall be construed as reference to the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person. 13. As per the provisions of section 153C of the Act the A. O. is required to initiate the proceedings and issue the notice only on the basis of money, bullion, jewellery, other article or thing seized or requisitioned belonged to or any books of accounts or documents seized or requisitioned pertains to or pertain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional fact. We find this reasoning to be logical and valid, having regard to the provisions of Section 153C of the Act. Para 9 of the order of the ITAT reveals that the ITAT had scanned through the Satisfaction Note and the material which was disclosed therein was culled out and it showed that the same belongs to Assessment Year 2004-05 or thereafter. After taking note of the material in para 9 of the order, the position that emerges there from is discussed in para 10. It was specifically recorded that the counsel for the Department could not point out to the contrary. It is for this reason the High Court has also given its imprimatur to the aforesaid approach of the Tribunal. That apart, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent, argued that notice in respect of Assessment Years 2000-01 and 2001-02 was even time barred. 19. We, thus, find that the ITAT rightly permitted this additional ground to be raised and correctly dealt with the same ground on merits as well. Order of the High Court affirming this view of the Tribunal is, therefore, without any blemish. Before us, it was argued by the respondent that notice in respect of the Assessment Years 2000-01 and 2001-0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
