9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od, without appreciating the fact that date of handing over is replaced for date of search only for the purpose of abatement of pending proceedings as per 2nd proviso of section 153A and not for counting the six year period in section 153A(1) of the Act. 2. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any / all of the grounds of appeal during the course of the hearing of the appeal. 2. The facts in brief are that a search and seizure operation was carried out at the various premises of M/s BPTP Ltd and its group concerns and associated persons (hereinafter called BPTP group of cases) on 07/12/2010 and was finally concluded on 05/02/2011.The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edeed and the payments of balance sale consideration were invariably made through post dated cheques (PDCs) and for the intervening period i.e. period between the date of sale deed and the date of encashment of PDCs), interest was paid in cash to the vendors of the land by the vendee company on monthly basis @1.25% p.m. on the amount of PDCs and his cash payment of interest by the vendee company, was not accounted for by it, in its books of account. The addition on the ground has been made in the several group companies of the BPTP group during the course of earlier assessment proceedings uls 143(3)/148/153A in consequence to search carried out on 15.11.2007. Hence vide order sheet entry dated 28/02/2013, the assessee was asked to explain a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd held that such date should be construed as date of initiation of search U/S 132 or date of requisition U/S 132A as per the first proviso to section 153C and accordingly ITAT has held that six A.Y. should be computed from the date of such handling over date for the purpose of section 153C. The findings of ITAT, Delhi in the case of DSL Properties (P) Ltd. cited supra is reproduced as under:- "12.1 In the case of M/s DSL Properties (P) Ltd in ITA No. 1349/Del/2012 for the AY 2004-05, order dated 22.02.2013 the ITAT Delhi 'B' Bench held as follows: "15. From a perusal of the said satisfaction note, it is evident that this paper does not indicate in whose case this satisfaction was recorded and who is the officer recording the satisfact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Officer of both the person was the same, there was no question of handing over and taking over of the documents. We are unable to agree with this view of the learned DR. If the Assessing Officer is assessing the person searched as well as other person whose assets, the books of account or documents were found at the time of search, then also, first while making the assessment in the case of the person searched, he has to record the satisfaction that the money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents belong to the person other than the person searched. Then, the copy of this satisfaction note is to be placed irr the file of such other person and the relevant document should also be transferred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel for the assessee has also argued that the issue of notice under section 153C is barred by limitation as per proviso of section 153C. He stated that as per Revenue, the satisfaction for initiating proceedings under section 153C was recorded on 21st June, 2010 and notice under Section 153C was also issued on 21st June, 2010. Thus, obviously, the seized paper was handed over to the Assessing Officer of such other person on 21 June, 2010. Now, as per proviso to Section 153C, the date of search is to be substituted by the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized. Accordingly, the assessment can be reopened of the preceding six years than 21st June, 2010. They would be AY 2005-06 to 2010-11. The rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 153C (or AY 2004-05 which is clearly barred by limitation. Therefore, issue of notice under Section 153C issued by the Revenue cannot be sustained on both the above counts, i. e. it is legally not valid as conditions laid down under section 153C has not been fulfilled and it is barred by limitation." 7.1 We further note that the aforesaid finding has been relied by the ITAT, H Bench New Delhi in the case of V.S. Fiscal Services (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT in appeal no. 5462-5465/De1/2012. 7.2 Therefore, applying the above ratio, in the instant case, date of receiving the seized documents and other evidences should be taken as 29.01.2013. By virtue of first proviso to section 153C, date of initiation of search for computing six assessment years ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
