9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 880X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 153C/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 31/03/2015 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in assuming jurisdiction u/s 153C and further erred in passing the impugned order u/s 153C/143(3) and that too without complying the other mandatory conditions under the law. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in assuming jurisdiction u/s 153C and further erred in passing the impugned order u/s 153C/143(3), is bad in law and against the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the case. 8. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the additional ground raised by the assessee. 9. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making impugned addition/disallowance and that too by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing the principles of natural justice. 10. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other." 2. The first preliminary ground raised by the assessee is challenging the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer of Sh. Raghuveer Sing Yadav on 11/02/2014 i.e., relevant to AY 2014-15. The AO in the search assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act proceeded to deny deduction u/s 80IC of the Act in the sum of Rs. 2,62,772/- in respect of interest income and proceeded to make addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- in respect of share capital received from Shri Ram EPC Ltd. as unexplained cash credit. 4. The assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) ultimately stated that there is absolutely no incriminating material for AY 2010-11 qua the additions made in the assessment. Further it was also pointed out that the seized document representing the cash of Rs. 7,75,660/- was received only on 11/02/2014, hence, that date would be construed as the date of search in the ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nating material relatable to AY 2010-11 qua the additions made in the hands of the assessee, in respect of concluded assessment, the earlier assessment so framed cannot be disturbed by the Ld. AO. This issue is no longer res-integra in view of the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. in Civil Appeal No.6580 of 2021 (SC) dated 24/04/2023. In any case, we further find that no assessment at all could be made u/s 153C of the Act for AY 2010-11, since, the seized documents representing the seized cash did not pertain to AY 2010-11. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Singhad Technical Education Society, reported in 397 ITR 03 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
