TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - SUPREME COURT ] Pr. CIT in the case of the present assessee before us was only vested with the jurisdiction to have revised the reassessment order that was passed by the A.O u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Act dated 23.12.2018. As the aforesaid order u/s. 143(3)/147 dated 23.12.2018 could have been revised u/s. 263 latest by 31.03.2021, which had lapsed way back, therefore, even the said remedy would not be available with the Pr. CIT. Pr. CIT had clearly exceeded his jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act and had wrongly revised the order passed by the A.O u/s. 153A/143(3) - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 44/RPR/2022 - - - Dated:- 11-7-2023 - Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member And Shri Arun Khodpia, Accountant Member For the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act were conducted on the business/residential/factory premises of the assessee on 15.02.2018. Assessment was, thereafter, framed by the A.O vide his order passed u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2019, determining the income of the assessee at Rs. 42,60,182/-, i.e. as originally assessed vide order passed u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Act dated 23.12.2018. 4. The Pr. CIT observing, that the A.O while framing assessment u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2019 had failed to conduct any enquiry or verification on certain issues, viz. (i) verification of multi-facet issues pertaining to the assessee s claim for deduction u/s. 54F of the Act, viz. documentary evidence to substantiate the transfer transaction i.e. purchase deed, val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act, and income of the assessee was assessed as was originally assessed vide order u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Act, dated 23.12.2018 at Rs. 42,60,182/-, therefore, it can safely be concluded that no incriminating material for the year under consideration was seized in the course of search and seizure proceedings conducted on the assessee u/s. 132 of the Act on 15.02.2018. Also, on the date on which, search and seizure proceedings were conducted in the case of the assessee u/s. 132 of the Act, i.e. on 15.02.2018, no assessment proceedings were pending in the case of the assessee. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 20.02.2018 was issued to the assessee only subsequent to the date on which search and seizure action was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts in absence of any incriminating material. 14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A; ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income taking into consideration the incriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material available with the AO including the income declared in the returns; and iv) in case no incriminating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... At the same time, we are of the considered view that in case the Pr. CIT held a conviction that there was any failure of the A.O to have carried out necessary enquiries/verifications with respect to certain issues which had in turn formed the very basis for reopening of his case u/s. 147 of the Act, then the only remedy available with him was to have revised the order that was passed by the A.O u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Act dated 23.12.2018. Our aforesaid observation is supported by the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Alagendran Finance Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 1(SC). The Hon ble Apex Court in its aforesaid order, had held, that as the case before them was reopened on an issue which did not form s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1, which had lapsed way back, therefore, even the said remedy would not be available with the Pr. CIT. 12. Be that as it may, on the basis of our aforesaid deliberations, we are of the considered view that the Pr. CIT had clearly exceeded his jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act and had wrongly revised the order passed by the A.O u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2019. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations set-aside the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act dated 10.02.2022 and restore the order passed by the A.O u/s. 153A/143(3) of the Act dated 29.12.2019. 13. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations. Order pronounced in open court on 11th day of July, 2023. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
