TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO having jurisdiction over both the persons was the one and the same, therefore, the requirement of handing over the records and recording of satisfaction for another AO was not necessary and he himself rightly proceeded u/s. 158BD of the I.T. Act. 4. That without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(A), Agra has not appreciated that as per provisions u/s. 292B, if any notice or assessment is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to intent and purpose of the Act, the same cannot be invalidated merely by reason of any mistake, omission or defects in such notice or return. 5. That the order of Ld. CIT(A) being erroneous in law and on facts needs to be vacated and the order of the AO be restored. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that search u/s. 132(1) was conducted at the business premises of the firm, M/s. Jain Glass Industries, Firozabad and the residential premises of the partners of the assessee firm, namely Shri Dinesh Chand Jain, Mahesh Chand and Shri Sanjay Kumar Jain of Firozabad and the books of account, diaries and large number of loose papers were seized. The seized papers contained the details of business activities of the person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the AO in the case of the assessee is same. Therefore, there is no need of recording specific satisfaction and relied upon the order of ITAT, Bangalore Bench in the case of Subhan Javeed vs. ACIT, 122 ITD 307 (Bang.). 5. We have considered the submissions of the ld. DR and the material on record. Section 158BD provides - 158BD. Where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any undisclosed income belongs to any person, other than the person with respect to whom search was made under section 132 or whose books of accounts or other documents or any assets were requisitioned under section 132A, then the books of accounts, other documents or assets seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed under section 158BC against such other person and the provisions of this Chapter shall apply accordingly. 5.1 Chapter XIV-B provides for special procedure in assessment in search cases. Section 158BC provides for block assessment in the cases in which search has been conducted under section 132 or documents requisitioned under section 132A. However, another provision under s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer of a person searched should be satisfied, (ii) that undisclosed income belongs to person other than the person in respect of whom search was conducted. (iii) the books of account or other documents or assets seized shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over than other person. (iv) the Assessing Officer shall proceed against such other person under the provisions of this chapter. On the basis of the search material in the possession of the Assessing Officer of a person who is searched, he must come to a prima facie view that undisclosed income belongs to other person. 6.2 ITAT, Allahabad Bench in the case of Vishwanath Prasad v. ACIT; 86 ITD 516 held- The department as such could not give surprise to the assessee at the appellate stage by mentioning that there was no authorization of search in the name of the assessee-firm. The satisfaction had to be arrived at by the initial Assessing Officer before proceedings under section 158BD. It was undisputed that the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee firm was the ITO. That fact was mentioned in the Panchanama also but later on the case was transferred to the Asstt. Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Law in this regard is clear and explicit. The only question which arises for our consideration is as to whether the notice dated February 6m 1996, satisfies the requirements of section 158BD of the Act. The said notice does not record any satisfaction on the part of the Assessing Officer. Documents and other assets recovered during search had not been handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction in the matter. It was further held- As the Assessing Officer has not recorded his satisfaction, which is mandatory; nor has he transferred the case to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the matter, we are of the opinion that the impugned judgments of the High Court cannot be sustained, which are set aside accordingly. The appeals are allowed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. 7. Considering the facts of the case in the light of the above decisions, it is clear that the ld. CIT(A) rightly appreciated the facts of the case for quashing the proceedings u/s. 158BD of the IT Act. The AO in the remand report specifically explained before the ld. CIT(A) that no reasons for recording satisfaction to p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
