Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 154 - AT - Income TaxAssessment to be framed u/s 153C OR u/s 147/148 - Validity of the reassessment proceedings - accommodation entry provided by the assessee - information was received from ADIT (Inv.) which was forwarded to PCIT and through him to the AO according to which a search and seizure action was carried out - HELD THAT:- It is clear that the provision of Section 153C of the Act can be invoked in case of “Other Person” if the recovery of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing seized or requisitioned belongs to person other than the searched person, then section 153C of the Act would be justified. In the present case, it is an undisputed fact that AO has noted that during the course of search conducted on 18.11.2015 at the various premises of Pradeep Kumar Jindal and on the basis of documents found during the course of survey at various other places, various incriminating material was found and seized, statement of various persons were recorded. Merely on the basis of information available with the AO or certain information made available prior to the handing over of the materials would not be sufficient to initiate proceedings u/s 153C of the Act and would not confer any power on the AO to initiate proceedings u/s 153C - In order to initiate proceedings to assess or reassess u/s 153C of the Act, the AO should mandatorily possess the seized material or other books of accounts etc and only after handing over of the materials to the AO of the other person, the AO is empowered to issue notice u/s 153C of the Act and that too after recording necessary satisfaction. Initiation of action u/s 153C would arise only if the seized material are handed over to the AO of such other person having jurisdiction of such other person. In the present case, it will be relevant to note that there is neither any material on record nor any evidence has been placed on record by the assessee to demonstrate that the seized and impounded material of the searched person was handed over to the AO of the assessee when the AO had initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and the AO had recorded satisfaction as contemplated u/s 153C of the Act. Thus in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Madras High court in the case of Karti Chidambaram [2021 (7) TMI 393 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] find no fault in the initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act by the AO and thus that there is no merit in the contention of the Ld AR that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C and not u/s 147/148 of the Act. Approval given by Addl. CIT and PCIT u/s 151 of the Act was in a mechanical way and without application of mind and therefore in the absence of proper satisfaction recorded by the competent authority, the assessment is invalid - Addl. CIT has after considering the reasons recorded by the AO has recorded his satisfaction and approval which in my view is valid approval - no merit in the contention of the Ld AR that sanction under section 151 of the Act was granted by the competent authority in a mechanical manner - statutory provisions do not require that the satisfaction has to be recorded in a particular manner. Ld AR has not placed on record any material to demonstrate the entire proposal along with the necessary details and the reasons recorded by the Income Tax Officer were not placed before the Addl.CIT and Principal CIT. See Experion Developers (P.) Ltd. [2020 (2) TMI 1061 - DELHI HIGH COURT] wherein held that there is no requirement to provide elaborate reasoning to arrive at a finding of approval when the Principal Commissioner is satisfied with the reasons recorded by the AO - no merit in the contentions of Learned AR about the satisfaction being recorded mechanically. Ground of the assessee is dismissed. Addition u/s 68 - As lower authorities by well reasoned orders and for the reasons stated in their orders have upheld the addition. Before us AR has neither pointed to any fallacy in the findings of the lower authorities nor has placed any material on record to controvert the findings of lower authorities. In such a situation, I find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and thus dismiss the ground of the assessee.
|