TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 925
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act"), has been invoked instead of Section 153 A of the Act. 2. BRIEF FACTS: 2.1. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and part of VV Group of Companies. The petitioner / company is engaged in the business of running a TV channel by name "News 7". There was a search in the petitioner / Company under Section 132 of the Act. There was also a search of VV Group concerns. During the course of search and seizure conducted in VV group concerns on 25.10.2018 incriminating materials relating to the petitioner /company was seized from the residence of one Mr. Kannan, cook to Shri. S.Vaikundarajan's family. On the basis of the materials so seized it was found that there were details of unaccounted cash receipts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as issued to the petitioner on 23.12.2020 by the Assessing Officer CIT Central Circle 2(4), Bangalore. A notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee calling for details including the details of increase in share capital. The assessee neither filed any return of income nor furnished the books of accounts and the business income was estimated at 8% of the total receipts i.e. Rs. 10,67,48,620/-. Further, it was found that while the share capital of the petitioner /company increased by Rs.124.6 crores, whereas in the return filed the petitioner / company was shown to be a loss making company for the past several years. In the absence of the relevant details relating to the source for raising the new share capital, the same....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e prescribed under Section 127 of the Act has not been complied with and consequently all further proceedings are void-abinitio. c. That the notices had not been served in the manner contemplated under the Income Tax Act. 6. To the contrary, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the Respondent that the Writ Petitions are not maintainable in view of availability of an alternate /statutory appellate remedy under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act. In this regard, reliance was placed on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of"CIT vs. Chhabil Dass Agarwal 2014 (1) SCC 603". The Respondent submits that the search under Section 132 of the Act was carried out at the premises of the petitioner at Chennai on 25.10.2018....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 127 of the Act would apply or not itself is debatable in view of the fact that the petitioner's registered place of business was shifted from Bangalore to Tamil Nadu and it was intimated by the Petitioner to the Department vide letter dated 13.06.2017. Section 127 of the Income Tax Act would apply only to those cases where there is transfer of a case from one jurisdiction to other and not a transfer of jurisdiction of the assesseee from one place to the other, as in the present case. ii. Secondly, the question whether notice ought to be issued under section 153A or 153C of the Act would depend upon whether the assessment proceedings are initiated/ made pursuant to a search under Section 132 of the petitioner premises or on the bas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant material and therefore, I must have copy of all seized material before I embark on responding to the show cause notices issued by the respondent... 9. I state that we were able to collect copies of panchanama's only in respect of 11 premises that were searched. My father, Mr. S. Vaikundarajan had many times requested the Respondent to give the details of the 63 premises search in relation to VV group and to give the copies of all seized material, which will be evident from the letters/e-mails my father had sent to the respondent and to his higher authorities. ... 10. I state that till date the respondent has not made available the details of premises searched in relation VV Group and the copies of material seized therefrom. ....