9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1012X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee's cross objections, several grounds are raised. The majority of the grounds relate to the issue of challenging the initiation of proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. It was submitted by the Ld. DR that the assessee's cross objections are belated and assessee has not filed condonation application for condoning the delay. With reference to the above contention, it was submitted by the Ld. counsel for the assessee that the certified true copies of the Revenue's appeals (Form 36 with the grounds of appeals) which was filed on 06.11.2013 was not received by the assessee and assessee had filed an application dated 17.11.2014 to the ITAT registry for providing the certified true copies of the Revenue's appeals. In was submitted that the certified true copies of the Revenue's appeals were furnished to the assessee on 19.11.2014 for the respective assessment years and cross objections were filed on 24.11.2014 within the prescribed time limit. The Director of the assessee's company has also filed an affidavit to this effect. The relevant portion of the affidavit filed by the Director of the assessee's company reads as follows:- "1. That, on 18.11.2014 'PVK Marketing Private Limited (former ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dering the written submission filed by the Revenue, the matter was decided against the Revenue on identical facts and circumstances of the instant case. The Ld. DR was unable to controvert the above contention of the Ld. AR. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The search and seizure operations u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the cases of Sri B.K.Dhingra, Poonam Dhingra and M/s. Madhusudan Buildcon (P) Limited on 20.10.2008. The AO recorded satisfaction Note for issuing Notice u/s 153C of the Act to the assessee on 5.7.2010 and the Notice u/s 153C of the Act was issued to the assessee on 8.7.2010. In response, the assessee filed returns of income for all the six assessment years under dispute. The satisfaction Note for initiation of proceedings u/s 153C of the Act against the assessee is placed at page 5 of the Paper Book filed by the assessee. The satisfaction Note recorded by the AO reads as follows: "Satisfaction Note for Issuing Notice u/s 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 in the case of M/s Extra Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Khasra No.34/7, Village Dera Mandi, Tehsil Meharauli, New Delhi, AABCE7963J for A.Y. 2003-04 to 2008-09. 05/07/2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16.1.2015]; (ii) DCIT v. M/s. Aakash Arogya Mindir P. Ltd [ITA Nos. 5437 to 5442/Del/2013 dated: 28.11.2014]; & (iii) ACIT v. Inlay Marketing Pvt. Ltd [ITA Nos.4200 to 4202/Del/2012 & 4197 to 4199/Del/2012 dated: 14.11.2014] (iv) DCIT Vs. Tanvir Finance & Leasing Ltd. (ITA Nos.14 to 17/Del/2014, CO Nos. 268 to 271/Del/2014 & ITA Nos. 3317 & 3318/Del/2014 dated 27.02.2015). 12. In the case of Tanvir Finance & Leasing Ltd. (supra), the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Since the facts and the contentions considered by the Revenue in the case of Tanvir Finance & Leasing Ltd. (supra) is identical to the present case, the finding of the Tribunal in the case of Tanvir Finance & Leasing Ltd. (Supra) is reproduced below:- "4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We have also taken into consideration the written submissions filed by the ld. DR on 27.02.2012. It is manifest from the assessment orders for the years under consideration that a search was carried out u/s 132 of the Act on Sh. B.K. Dhingra, Smt. Poonam Dhingra & M/s Madhusudan Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. and in such search proceedings, some i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Sh. Bhupesh Kumar Dhingra, which is covered u/s 153A, for the assessment years from 2003-04 to 2008-09 (Block period) it is noticed that there is no 'satisfaction note' available/recorded in respect of other entities. 3. In case you intend to file the appeal, you may file the same before the Addl. CIT, Central Range-2, 3rd Floor, ARA Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi within 30 days from receipt of this letter." 6. From the above reproduced satisfaction recorded by the AO of the assessee and the reply given under the RTI Act to the three persons who were searched u/s 132, it becomes apparent that no satisfaction was recorded by the AO of the persons searched before embarking upon the assessments of the assessee. 7. At this stage, we want to clarify that certain cases in which the assessments were framed u/s 153C of the Act on some entities pursuant to search on Sh. B.K. Dhingra, Smt. Poonam Dhingra & M/s Madhusudan Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. in identical circumstances, came up for consideration before the Tribunal. In all these cases similar objections were raised by the assessee to the effect that no proper satisfaction was recorded by the AO of such assessees. The Tribunal has disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isdiction on the AO to frame assessment on the 'other persons'. It is only the recording of proper satisfaction by the AO of the person searched that the documents found from such person searched belong to the "other person", that the AO of the `other person' acquires jurisdiction to frame the assessment. Appraisal report is no substitute of satisfaction of the AO of the person searched. 12. The ld. DR further submitted that the Tribunal should not take a hyper technical view on the question of recording satisfaction and hence the proceedings should be allowed to continue since huge amounts are involved in the racket, which was unearthed by the search party. 13. We duly appreciate the concern of the ld. DR for the exchequer. But we are reminded of the basic principle enshrined in Article 265 of the Constitution that no tax can be collected without authority of law. There can be no assessment in the absence of a proper jurisdiction of the authority. The question of jurisdiction is a very important aspect, which cannot be equated with a technical issue. Similar contention raised by the ld. DR has been elaborately dealt with by the Tribunal in the case of Tanvir Collections P. Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... diction to the AO of the assessee to proceed with the matter of assessment u/s 153C of the Act for all the years under consideration. 19. In view of our decision on the above preliminary legal issue, there is no need to examine the other legal issues raised by the assessee or the merits of the case as contested in the present appeals. 20. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of the Revenue are dismissed." 13. In the case of M/s. Aakash Arogya Mindir P. Ltd v. DCIT (supra), the earlier Bench of this Tribunal had followed the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pepsi Foods P. Ltd v. ACIT (sic) Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT [source: Para 6 on page 6 of the order dt.28.11.2014]. 14. In the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd v. ACIT (supra) and also the findings of the earlier Benches of this Tribunal (supra), we hold that since there was no 'satisfaction Note' by the AO of searched person prior to initiation of proceedings u/s 153C of the Act, the assessments concluded on the assessee u/s 153C of the Act r.w.s 153A of the Act lack jurisdict ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
