TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 570X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I 733 - DELHI HIGH COURT] decline to admit the substantial question of law raised by the Revenue challenging the decision in the case of RRJ Securities Pvt. Ltd. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and it is justified and we completely agree with the reasons recorded by the CIT(A) in his order in para no 6 which is reproduced herein above. Ground nos. 1 and 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed. - IT(SS)A No. 41/Kol/2019, C.O. No. 37/Kol/2019 (Arising out of IT(SS)A No. 41/Kol/2019 - - - Dated:- 12-2-2020 - Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President And Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Mr. Sunil Surana, Advocate For the Revenue : Mr. Imokaba Jamir, CIT DR ORDER PER S.S. VISWAN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee, the date of recording of satisfaction note i.e. (29.05.2017) is to be reckoned for determination of block AYs as prescribed u/s 153C(1) of the Act and contended that the assessment made under block period for A.Y. 2010-11 is barred by limitation. The CIT(A) consider the same and by placing reliance in the case of RRJ Securities Ltd. 380 ITR 612 (Delhi) held the notice dated 30.05.2017 issued u/s 153C for A.Y. 2010-11 is barred by limitation and quashed the assessment made u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2010-11. For ready reference, the relevant portion of CIT(A) is reproduced herein below: I have considered the assessment records, the assessment order and the written submission filed by the AR as well a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessments/reassessments that were pending on the date of receiving such assets, books of account or documents would abate. (Para 14). The recording of a satisfaction that the assets/documents seized belong to a person other than the person searched is necessarily the first step towards initiation of proceedings under section 153C. In the case where the Assessing Officer of the searched person as well as the other person is one and the same, the date on which such satisfaction is recorded would be the date on which the Assessing Officer assumes possession of the seized assets/documents in his capacity as an Assessing Officer of the person other than the one searched (Para 18) Once the Assessing Officer of the searched pers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... support the case of the assessee. i. Delhi High Court in case of Sarwar Agency 397 ITR 400 has followed the decision of RRJ Securities 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). ii. ITAT, Delhi, F-Bench, Delhi in the case of M/s. BNB Investment Properties Ltd., Gurgaon, Haryana vs The DCIT, Central Circle -1, Faridabad in ITA Nos. 504 503/Del/2015, dated 27.06.2018. iii. Empire Casting Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT, CC-2, New Delhi. iv. Pavitra Realcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT, CC-32, New Delhi. Therefore as per this decision of Delhi High Court date of initiation of search shall be the date of receiving of seized material or assets seized (i.e. date of recording of satisfaction). And six assessment years prior to the date of sea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation and the AO issued the notice within prescribed time period in accordance with law. The CIT(A) erred in considering the submissions of the assessee and by making incorrect interpretation of section 153C of the Act allowed the appeal of the assessee. The ld. DR argued that the AO issued the notice within time and opposed vehemently the order of CIT(a). He prayed to allow grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue. 8. The ld. AR reiterated the same contention as made before the CIT(A) and placed on record the decision of Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of RRJ Securities Ltd. reported in 380 ITR 612 and Sarwar Agency Pvt. Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 400. He prayed to dismiss grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue. 9. According to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue challenging the decision in the case of RRJ Securities Pvt. Ltd. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and it is justified and we completely agree with the reasons recorded by the CIT(A) in his order in para no 6 which is reproduced herein above. Thus ground nos. 1 and 2 raised by the Revenue are dismissed. Cross-objection of assessee in C.O. No. 37/Kol/2019 11. We find that the assessee raised grounds of appeal in support of order passed by the CIT(A). In the aforementioned paragraph, we have taken a decision to uphold the order of CIT(A) and therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee in cross objection becomes academic requiring no adjudication. 12. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
