TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leted u/s 153C/153A for the impugned assessment year is void ab-initio since the Assessing Officer has no jurisdiction for making the assessment for assessment year 2006-07 being beyond the period of six years. Since the order of the ld. CIT(A) is in accordance with law laid down by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in RRJ SECURITIES LTD. AND VICA-VERSA [ 2015 (11) TMI 19 - DELHI HIGH COURT] therefore, in absence of any contrary material brought to our notice, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) holding the assessment as void ab-initio. Accordingly, the order of ld. CIT(A) is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. - ITA No.5692/Del/2016 In C.O. No.39/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 25-5-2018 - SHRI R. K. PANDA AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JJ. Appellant by : Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT-DR, Respondent by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. ORDER R. K. PANDA, J . The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 31.08.2016 of CIT(A)- 30, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2006-07. The assessee has filed the Cross Objection against the appeal filed by the Revenue. For the sake of convenience, these were hear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Ltd. Premise from where documents found and seized: Residence of Sh. S.S. Jindal, Mr. Bhavesh Jindal; Address 12, Green Avenue, Sector- D, Pocket- 3, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi PARTY No.R1. A-18 54-60 Details of shares of Champak Niketan Pvt. Ltd. purchased. I have examined the above documents and the contents noted/written therein. After examination of these documents, I am satisfied that these aforesaid documents belong to M/s Champak Niketan Pvt. Ltd. In view of the same, I am further satisfied that it is fit case for initiating proceedings u/s 153C rws 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, notices u/s 153C rws 153A are required to be issued as per provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Assessing Officer accordingly issued notice u/s 153C r.w.s. 153A on 03.12.2013. The assessee in response to the said notice, filed its return of income on 20.12.2013 declaring total income of ₹ 4,577/-. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order has mentioned that the assessee has no objection for completing the assessment u/s 153C of the I.T. Act which is implied. He furth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer has wrongly issued notice u/s 153C for assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 without having any jurisdiction. Relying on various decisions including the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s RRJ Securities Ltd. reported in 380 ITR 612, it was argued that the date of handing over of material belonging to the assessee has to be construed as reference date for initiation of action u/s 153C as against the date of initiation of search that has to be construed as reference date for initiation of action u/s 153A of the I.T. Act. 6. Based on the arguments advanced by the assessee and following the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of RRJ Securities Ltd. (supra), ld. CIT(A) held that the assessment completed u/s 153C/153A was void ab-initio since the notice u/s 153C was issued beyond the limitation period of six years from the reference date. He, however, rejected the claim of the assessee that initiation of proceedings u/s 153C was not valid since no books of account belonging to the assessee as envisaged in that section were found and seized during the course of search on the person referred in section 153A of the I.T. Act. The r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.Y. 2013-14 only. From the above, it is clear that A.O. has wrongly issued notices u/s 153C for A.Y. 2006-07 and A.Y. 2007-08, since the documents were handed over on 03.12.2013. Therefore, the notice issued by the A.O., is beyond the limitation period of 6 years from the reference date, prescribed in the first proviso to section 153C(1) and 153A(1) of Act. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the assessment completed u/s 153C/ 153A of the Act, is void ab-initio, as the A.O. has no jurisdiction making the assessment for A.Y. 2006-07, being beyond period of 6 years. As such, facts of the appellant are squarely covered by the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi, in the case of CIT-7 vs. M/s RRJ Securities Ltd., [2016] 380 : 612 (Delhi) (supra) In view of the above, I agree with the arguments of the appellant and therefore, I hold that the assessment completed u/s 153C/153A, is void ab initio, since notice u/s 153C was issued beyond limitation period of 6 years from the reference date. 7. Aggrieved with such order of the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds :- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out prejudice to each other. 8. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 8. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the search in the case of Jindal Group of cases took place on 14.11.2011 during which certain documents/bills belonging to the assessee were found and seized from the premises of the searched parties. It is also an admitted fact that the satisfaction note was prepared on 03.12.2013 and the documents were handed over on 03.12.2013. The notice u/s 153C was also issued to the assessee on 03.12.2013. 9. It is the submission of ld. counsel for the assessee that as per the proviso to section 153C(1) of the I.T. Act, the reference date for taking action u/s 153C will be 03.12.2013 in the case of the assessee and therefore, the impugned assessment year falls outside the purview of the period of six years. 10. We find the provisions of section 153C read as under :- Assessment of income of any other person. 153C. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expressly indicate that reference to the date of initiation of search for the purpose of second proviso to section 153A, shall be construed as a reference to the date on which valuable assets or documents are received by the Assessing Officer of an assessee (other than the search person). We find the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Sarwar Agency (P.) Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 400 after considering the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of RRJ Securities Ltd. (supra) has observed as under :- 6. The case of the Revenue is that the first proviso to Section 153 C refers only to the second proviso to Section 153 A(1) of the Act, which only indicates that any assessment relating to any AY falling within the period of six AYs which is pending as of the initiation of search shall abate. Therefore, the second proviso to Section 153 C is also concerned only with the aspect of abatement of pending assessments. According to the Revenue, this makes no difference to the computation of the block of six years preceding the AY relevant to the previous year /in which the search was conducted. In other words, according to the Revenue, the block period for bot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... viso to Section 153A of the Act as it applies to proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, the assessment/reassessment pending on the date on which the assets/documents are received by the AO would abate. In respect of such assessments which have abated, the AO would have the jurisdiction to proceed and make an assessment. However, in respect of concluded assessments, the AO would assume jurisdiction to reassess provided that the assets/documents received by the AO represent or indicate any undisclosed income or possibility of any income that may have remained undisclosed in the relevant assessment years..... 24. As discussed hereinbefore, in terms of proviso to Section 153C of the Act, a reference to the date of the search under the second proviso to Section 153A of the Act has to be construed as the date of handing over of assets/documents belonging to the Assessee (being the person other than the one searched) to the AO having jurisdiction to assess the said Assessee. Further proceedings, by virtue of Section 153C(1) of the Act, would have to be in accordance with Section 153A of the Act and the reference to the date of search would have to be construed as the reference t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sdiction over such other person and the six earlier AYs would have to be reckoned with reference to such postponed date of search. The first proviso to Section 153 B (1) does not support the case sought to be canvassed by the Revenue. It refers to and acknowledges that the date of search qua the 'other person', in terms of the first proviso to Section 153 C (1), gets postponed to the date on which documents are handed over to the AO of the 'other person'. Consequently, the question of referring the case to a larger Bench does not arise. 8. In the present case, there is no doubt that it was only on 24th March 2009 that the AO of the Assessee received the documents seized and it was on that date a notice under Section 153C (1) was issued and served upon the Assessee. Consequently, this Court finds no legal error in the conclusion of the ITAT that notice under Section 153C (1) could not have been issued for AYs 2001-02 and 2002-03. 9. No substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appeals are dismissed. 13. Since in the instant case also the documents were handed over to the Assessing Officer on 03.12.2013 and action u/s 153C was also in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
