TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of notice under section 153C and the incriminating material found as a result of search must exist. Since in the instant case no incriminating material was found and seized during the course of search which belonging to the assessee company, the Judgment of Sinhgad Technical Education Society (supra), is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Further, the Hon ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court also in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla [ 2015 (9) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . - Decided against revenue. - ITA.Nos.3633, 3634, 3635, 3636, 3637 & 3638/Del./2019 And Cross Objection Nos.57, 58, 59, 60, 61 & 62/Del./2022 Arising out of ITA.Nos.3633, 3634, 3635, 3636, 3637 & 3638/Del./2019 - - - Dated:- 24-11-2022 - Shri Chandra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 80,000/- on account of unverified share capital for the A.Y. 2009-10. 2.1. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) contending, inter alia, that the notice issued by the A.O. under section 153C is without jurisdiction and barred by limitation and the consequent additions made are not sustainable in the eye of law as no incriminating material was found and seized as a result of search and have bearing on the determination of total income of the assessee company. The Ld. CIT(A) examined the matter in issue, call for the remand report from the A.O. and the rejoinders filed by the assessee to the said remand report and held that since no incriminating material was found and seized as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sued when AO is satisfied that seized material has a bearing on the assessment of income of other person. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) did not appreciate the facts and material on record. 5. The order of the Ld CIT(A) is erroneous in law and on facts of the case and is liable to be set aside and the order of the AO be restored. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend any other more ground of appeal as state above as and when needs for doing so may arise. 4. During the course of hearing, the Ld. D.R. relied on the order of the A.O. and reiterated the contentions made by the A.O. in the assessment order and prayed that the order of the A.O. be confirmed. 5. On the other hand, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd during the course of search and in support of his contention he relied on the decision of Hon ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del.) and submitted that even the Coordinate Benches of Delhi Tribunal has rendered numerous decisions by following the decision of Hon ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Kabul Chawla (supra). He accordingly prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be confirmed and additions made by the A.O. be deleted in all the assessment years under appeals. 6. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties, perused the orders of the authorities below and the material available on record. We find that the sum and substance of the issue inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt case has failed to demonstrate that seized document belongs to the assessee company and no seized documents were found as a result of search and have bearing on the determination of total income of the assessee company. Therefore, we find that the above imperative three jurisdictional conditions for issuance of notice under section 153C of the Act are not satisfied. In support of our above observation, we rely on the Judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT-3, Pune Vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society (supra) wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has held that the nexus between issue of notice under section 153C and the incriminating material found as a result of search must exist. Since in the instant case no incriminating ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we dismiss the grounds raised by the Revenue. 7. In the result, ITA.No.3633/Del./2019 of the Revenue is dismissed. ITA.Nos.3634, 3635, 3636, 3637 3638/Del./2019 A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 8. In all these assessment years, identical facts are involved. The A.O. issued notices under section 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the A.Ys. 2010-11 to 2014-15 under appeals. In response to the notices, the assessee filed its return of income showing income of Rs.NIL, Rs.2,42,67,316/-, Rs.(-) 2,52,83,139/-, Rs.(-) 23,89,86,306 and Rs.(-)37,35,497/- for the A.Ys. 2010-11 to 2014-15. Subsequently, the A.O. issued notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and completed assessment by making add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
