TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome. This being the undisputed position, no investigation was necessary. Thus, the provisions of section 153C, which are to enable an investigation in respect of the seized asset, could not be resorted to; the AO had no jurisdiction to make the reassessment under Section 153C of the Act - Decided in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. - ITA 171/2015, ITA 172/2015, ITA 173/2015, ITA 174/2015 - - - Dated:- 5-11-2015 - S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr N.P. Sahni, Senior Standing Counsel with MR Nitin Gulati, Junior Standing Counsel For the Respondent : Mr. Arvind Kumar and Mr. Vikas Jain JUDGMENT Vibhu Bakhru, J 1. The Revenue has preferred these appeals under Section 260A of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g questions were framed:- 1. Did the ITAT fall into error in holding that Section 69C was inapplicable in the facts and circumstances of the present cases given that the Revenue s contention was that the material in the form of statement recorded during the search proceedings indicated that no genuine sale and purchase transaction was entered into by the assessee; and 2. Whether in the circumstances, the AO was justified in bringing to tax the amounts disallowed in the course of search assessment under Section 153C. 3. At the outset, Mr Kumar, learned counsel for the Assessee submitted that the AO had no jurisdiction to make an assessment under Section 153C of the Act as no relevant material belonging to the Assessee had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted, the relevant facts necessary to address the issues involved in the above captioned matters are as under:- 6.1 Search and seizure operations were undertaken under Section 132 of the Act in the case of Sh. B.K. Dhingra, Smt. Poonam Dhingra and M/s Madhusudan Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (hereafter also referred to as searched persons ) on 20th October, 2008. Certain documents belonging to the Assessee Company were seized during the search. The AO of the Assessee recorded a Satisfaction Note on 5th July, 2010 to the effect that the documents seized belonged to the Assessee and, hence, Section 153C was invokeable. On the aforesaid basis, proceedings were initiated under Section 153C and a notice dated 6th July, 2010 for the AY 2003-04 was issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B-340, Hari Nagar, New Delhi . These concerns were alleged to be capital formation concerns with huge reserves and surpluses that were reflected as invested in stock of textiles. The AO also found that no operations were undertaken from the aforementioned premises. In view of the aforesaid, the AO concluded that the Assessee was unable to substantiate any purchase of stocks and, therefore, made addition of the amounts reflected as purchases under Section 69C of the Act. The AO also disallowed 100% of the expenses claimed by the Assessee in its P L Account concluding that they were unverifiable. 6.6 In response to a request under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the ACIT vide a letter dated 14th May, 2015 provided the Assessee with a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of expenditure and depreciation claimed by the Assessee. The aforesaid order is impugned in the present appeals. 7. It is apparent from the above that the only document seized during the search in question was a cheque book pertaining to the Assessee which reflected issue of cheques during the period August 2008 to October 2008, relevant to the AY 2009-10. The facts and the questions of law that arise in these appeals are similar to the facts and the controversy involved in RRJ Securities Ltd. (supra). Thus, for the reasons stated in RRJ Securities Ltd. (supra), the third question framed, whether the proceedings under Section 153C of the Act could be initiated against the Assessee, is answered in favour of the Assessee and against the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
