TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1772X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or a stated consideration of ₹ 49,50,000/-. The share of the assessee was 50%, which amounted to ₹ 24,75,000/-. A search and seizure action u/s 132(1) of the Act was conducted at various premises connected with a Vijay Group of cases in Mumbai, and in the course of which, the premises at 1, Tarlika, Ground Floor, Plot No. 216, Sir Balchandra Road, Matunga, Mumbai 400019 was also searched, which was also the office of one M/s. N.M. associates, Chartered Accountants. From such premises, various documents and loose papers belonging to M/s. Motta Construction Pvt. Ltd. were found and seized. Shri Kiran H. Shah, Director of M/s. Motta Construction Pvt. Ltd. was examined by the income-tax authorities at Mumbai on 14.10.2005 with respect to the material so seized. One of the Note-Books seized was containing details of payments in cash of ₹ 1,04,50,000/- to the assessee and the other co-owner in relation to the property at Matunga, Mumbai. The said information, alongwith the Note-Book reflecting payments to Nadkarnis, and also a copy of the statement of Shri Kiran H. Shah recorded u/s 131 of the Act dated 14.10.2005 were received by the Assessing Officer of the assessee b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment u/s 153C of the Act relating to assessment of income of any person other than the person searched u/s 132(1) of the Act. According to the learned counsel, the material found in the course of search at Mumbai was passed on to the Assessing Officer of the assessee and therefore, on that basis the Assessing Officer ought to have initiated proceedings of assessment by issuing notice u/s 153C of the Act and not u/s 148 of the Act. The learned counsel has further emphasized that the section 148 and section 153C r.w.s. 153A of the Act operate in different fields, a proposition which has been upheld by the Hon ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ramballabh Gupta vs. ACIT, (2007) 288 ITR 347 (MP). In support of his argument, the learned counsel referred to the following expression contained in section 153C of the Act Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153 to say that the Assessing Officer has no jurisdiction to issue notice for re-assessment in the present case u/s 148 of the Act since sections 153C or 153A of the Act, as the case may be, deal exclusively with assessments consequent to a search ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 148 of the Act are satisfied in the present case so as to test the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer to assess the escaped income. 8. Ostensibly, the material and the information which has been received by the Assessing Officer from his counterparts in Mumbai justifies a primefacie belief that an income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act to the extent of the sale consideration paid in cash to the assessee over and above what has been stated in the sale agreement dated 23.12.1999 with respect to the sale of property at Matunga, Mumbai. In fact, in the course of hearing before us, no particular argument has been raised to the effect that the ingredients prescribed in section 148 of the Act have not been fulfilled in the present case. Therefore, in our view, we find no reasons to invalidate the initiation of re-assessment proceedings in the present case by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. 9. Now, we may address the plea of the assessee based on the judgment of the Hon ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ramballabh Gupta (supra). In the case before the Hon ble Madhya Pra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isition u/s 132A of the Act, the requirements contained in section 153C of the Act have to be satisfied so as to enable the Assessing Officer to make an assessment or re-assessment u/s 153A of the Act. Therefore, the aforesaid distinction has to be kept in mind before appreciating the import of the observations made by the Hon ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ramballabh Gupta (supra). The assessee before the Hon ble High Court was put to search whereas the assessee before us has not been put to any search action. Hence, we are unable to hold that the ratio of the judgment of the Hon ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Ramballabh Gupta (supra) helps the case of the assessee to demonstrate the invalidity of the initiation of re-assessment proceedings by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act in the present case. 11. Apart from the aforesaid, the other plea of the assessee is with regard to the quantum of addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unaccounted consideration. On this aspect, the learned counsel submitted that even in the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had pointed out through a letter dated 03.12.2007 that the statement by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
